Home - News - Court - Seksualiti Merdeka judicial review decision March 1

Seksualiti Merdeka judicial review decision March 1

Posted on February 22, 2012, Wednesday

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here fixed March 1 for its decision on a judicial review application filed by the organisers of Seksualiti Merdeka challenging the police ban on the sexuality rights festival in November last year.

Judge Datuk Rohana Yusuf set the date in chambers in the presence of senior federal counsel Noor Hisham Ismail for the three respondents and counsel Honey Tan Lay Ean representing the five applicants.

The organisers of the festival, Khee Teik, 38, Angela Marianne Kuga Thas, 47, S Thilaga Socky Pillai, 24, Siti Zabedah Kasim, 48, and Md Nor Ismat Selamat filed the application on Dec 9, 2011.

They named deputy Inspector-General of police Datuk Seri Khalid Abu Bakar, Dang Wangi deputy police chief Nor Azman Muhammad Yusuf and Inspector-General of police Tan Sri Ismail Omar as the respondents.

Noor Hisham told reporters that the application had become more of an academic exercise.

However, Honey Tan responded that it was not so as the event was supposed to have taken place last year and furthermore the ban’s enforcement period had not been stated, whether for a year or indefinitely. The respondents claimed that Khalid had no power whatsoever to declare the ban on their programme during a press conference on Nov 3 last year.

They further said Khalid’s decision was against the law and Articles 8 and 10 of the Federal Constitution and applied for a certiorari order to strike it out.

Seksualiti Merdeka is an annual festival which started in 2008 as a movement championing the freedom of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Meanwhile, two lawyers representing non-governmental organisations (NGO) and Bar Council told reporters they had not been allowed to hold a watching brief on the case. S Meera for the NGOs and Roger Chan from the Bar Council expressed disappointment with the judge’s ruling as they represented various organisations and the case was of public interest. — Bernama

Print Friendly

Comments are closed.