KOTA KINABALU: The Sabah Law Association (SLA) said the recent tabling of the Peaceful Assembly Bill (PAB) 2011 would only continue to shackle Malaysians with its heavy chains when the rest of the world are marching towards greater freedom where human rights take centre stage.
The association also contended that the PAB as it stands is unconstitutional.
The SLA pointed out that the people’s rights to assemble peaceably unarmed and the right to freedom of expression are already engraved in Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.
It also cited the Federal Court in Sivarasa Rasiah’s case in 2010 that had recognised these rights as part of the basic structure of the Federal Constitution.
“In the guise of maintaining security and public order the Government has now deemed it fit to take away our fundamental right of expression and to assemble,” said the association in a statement.
The SLA expressed fear that if the PAB were to be passed, it would be more for its restrictions on the citizens’ rights than in advancing it.
“Of what value is a right to assemble when peaceful street protests by unarmed citizens would now be totally banned which hitherto could be carried out with permit under Section 27(2) of the Police Act 1967?
“Of what value is the right to assemble when a prior notice need to be given and police permit obtained when the feature of assembly lies in its spontaneity?” asked the association.
The SLA contended that the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri’s view that the PAB is not unconstitutional because Article 10(2) allows Parliament by law to restrict the freedom of assembly is too simplistic a view.
“This does not give Parliament the carte blanche to pass any law that renders the fundamental rights a mirage.
“We need to be reminded only of the Supreme Court decisions in 1992 and 2010. In Nordin Salleh’s case it was held that it would be unconstitutional for Parliament to enact laws that would render the fundamental rights illusory.
“In Sivarasa Rasiah’s case it was held that any restriction to the fundamental rights under Article 10 must be reasonable and proportionate to the object march the restrictive legislation seeks to achieve,” it added.