Legal experts have warned that those who spoke up at Bersih's People's Tribunal could face legal repercussions as they are without immunity.
PETALING JAYA: Those ‘testifying’ before Bersih’s People’s Tribunal could spark a legal backlash of defamation and other civil suits, and possibly charged with sedition, legal experts said today.
Civil Liberties lawyer Syahredzan Johan and legal expert Dr Azmi Sharom concur that unlike the Royal Commission Inquiry (RCI) and Suhakam inquiry, the Bersih’s tribunal was without the involvement of government officials thus, it had no legal standing and the “witnesses” were without immunity.
“However, this is not to discourage anyone but since civil experts have concurred that Malaysian courts are quick to discharge election offences cases, the people have to resort this avenue to voice their dissatisfaction with the general election,” Syahredzan said.
According to him, the government was supposed to look into the alleged election offences but it failed to do so therefore, such tribunals were set up for the citizens to vent their grouses. The people’s lack of confidence in the system also compelled the people to resort to such tribunals.
Syahredzan also urged the tribunal organisers to advise their witnesses before hand on the repercussions of testifying.
“Remember, the people are speaking out without fear and telling the truth…that is the best weapon to defeat defamation,” he said.
Another legal expert Dr Azmi Sharom also echoed the views, saying that Bersih organisers should give legal aid or protection if there is any legal charges taken up against the witnesses.
“Since the courts are shunning election offence cases, the people have nowhere to go to vent their pent up dissatisfaction except at these tribunals,” he said.
Bersih 2.0 organised the five-day “People’s Tribunal on 13th General Elections” with a coalition of 84 NGOs voicing for clean and fair elections to investigate the conduct of the last general election and to provide a platform for Malaysians to make their voice heard.
The Head of the Legal Team would tender arguments and “evidence” of those who “testified” at the tribunal to a panel of eminent figures.
On the second day of the tribunal yesterday, notable witnesses had made claims such as Barisan Nasional supporters from the Tapah parliamentary constituency threatening PKR security aide late K Murugan during the 13th general election campaign and Cameron Highlands MP G Palanivel had dabbled in money politics and resorting to threats to win the seat.
Yesterday, Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail called the tribunal a public stunt that has not legal grounds.
He said the Bersih tribunal was different from a Royal Commission of Inquiry which is a formal public inquiry into a specific issue and governed by certain acts.
PETALING JAYA: Those ‘testifying’ before Bersih’s People’s Tribunal could spark a legal backlash of defamation and other civil suits, and possibly charged with sedition, legal experts said today.Civil Liberties lawyer Syahredzan Johan and legal expert Dr Azmi Sharom concur that unlike the Royal Commission Inquiry (RCI) and Suhakam inquiry, the Bersih’s tribunal was without the involvement of government officials thus, it had no legal standing and the “witnesses” were without immunity.
“However, this is not to discourage anyone but since civil experts have concurred that Malaysian courts are quick to discharge election offences cases, the people have to resort this avenue to voice their dissatisfaction with the general election,” Syahredzan said.
According to him, the government was supposed to look into the alleged election offences but it failed to do so therefore, such tribunals were set up for the citizens to vent their grouses. The people’s lack of confidence in the system also compelled the people to resort to such tribunals.
Syahredzan also urged the tribunal organisers to advise their witnesses before hand on the repercussions of testifying.
“Remember, the people are speaking out without fear and telling the truth…that is the best weapon to defeat defamation,” he said.
Another legal expert Dr Azmi Sharom also echoed the views, saying that Bersih organisers should give legal aid or protection if there is any legal charges taken up against the witnesses.
“Since the courts are shunning election offence cases, the people have nowhere to go to vent their pent up dissatisfaction except at these tribunals,” he said.
Bersih 2.0 organised the five-day “People’s Tribunal on 13th General Elections” with a coalition of 84 NGOs voicing for clean and fair elections to investigate the conduct of the last general election and to provide a platform for Malaysians to make their voice heard.
The Head of the Legal Team would tender arguments and “evidence” of those who “testified” at the tribunal to a panel of eminent figures.
On the second day of the tribunal yesterday, notable witnesses had made claims such as Barisan Nasional supporters from the Tapah parliamentary constituency threatening PKR security aide late K Murugan during the 13th general election campaign and Cameron Highlands MP G Palanivel had dabbled in money politics and resorting to threats to win the seat.
Yesterday, Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail called the tribunal a public stunt that has not legal grounds.
He said the Bersih tribunal was different from a Royal Commission of Inquiry which is a formal public inquiry into a specific issue and governed by certain acts.
No comments:
Post a Comment