Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) co-founder Eric Paulsen was arrested under the Sedition Act in Kuala Lumpur this afternoon, over his tweets for the second time, his lawyer Melissa Sasidaran said today. 

 

"Yes, we have been told that they will detain him overnight. He was arrested under Sedition Act over his tweets this morning," she told Malaysiakini when contacted around 6.30pm.

 

"Police are here at Art For Grabs to arrest Paulsen and confiscate his phone,"  she  first tweeted at 4.50pm.

 

Arts For Grabs is an arts and crafts market at Dataran Merdeka in Kuala Lumpur.

 

Shortly after that, Sasidaran ( left ) tweeted again saying Paulsen will be brought to the Dang Wangi police station to be investigated for sedition over his tweets.

 

LFL has tweeted that Paulsen is currently being held at the police station and the police are planning to remand him.

 

Latheefa Koya, a member of LFL, told Malaysiakini the arrest was regarding Eric's tweets on PAS and hudud. 

 

According to The Rakyat Post today, inspector-general of police (IGP) Khalid Abu Bakar was quoted as ticking Paulsen off for commenting on hudud.

 

"Who is Paulsen to question whether the hudud law is fair or not? It’s a sensitive issue, why question that?" the IGP was quoted saying.

Second arrest

The news portal also screenshot Eric's tweet. One read “Do not simply believe that everything will be okay with hudud implementation - no basis that hudud will run smoothly in Malaysia.” 

 

However, Paulsen has deleted these tweets.

 

This is the second time Paulsen has been arrested; he was first arrested in January when he alleged Jakim encouraged "extremism" during Friday sermons.

 

He was charged the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court under Section 4(1)(c) of the Sedition Act and was released on bail of RM2,000 with one surety, after spending two nights in the police lockup.

 

He faces a maximum fine of RM5,000, a jail term not more than three years, or both.

 

The case was set for mention on April 27 as the defence team awaits the result of the Federal Court case challenging the constitutionality of the Act. A ruling is expected on Tuesday.