PUTRAJAYA: In a landmark decision, the Court of Appeal on Friday ruled that Section 3 (3) of the Sedition Act 1948 which deals with the
element of intention of a person charged with making seditious statements, as invalid.
A three-man bench chaired by Justice Lim Yee Lan unanimously allowed the appeal brought by Sri Muda assemblyman Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei over his challenge on the constitutionality of the provision.
Justice Varghese George Varughese, who delivered the judgment, said Section 3 (3) violated the constitutional rights of citizens to be treated and protected equally before the law.
The other judge on the panel was Justice Datuk Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal. Lawyer N. Surendran, representing Mat Shuhaimi, said following the court’s decision, the prosecution conducting sedition cases must prove the intention of a person charged with the commission of the offence.
Section 3 (3) states that for purposes of proving the commission of any offence under the Sedition Act, the intention of a person charged, was deemed irrelevant if in fact the act had or would, if done, the words, publication had a seditious tendency.
Mat Shuhaimi, 48, filed an application in September 2014 seeking the court to declare Section 3 and 4 of the Sedition Act invalid as he claimed the provisions violated the fundamental liberty of freedom of speech guaranteed by Article 10(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution. Section 4 deals with the penalty for the offence.
He is currently facing a sedition charge for allegedly posting seditious material on his blog at Pusat Khidmat Rakyat, Jalan Anggerik Vanilla, Kota Kemuning in Shah Alam on December 30, 2010. – Bernama