Malaysian Bar, office-bearers awarded RM59,499 after winning part of appeal over 2022 independence march

The Court of Appeal awarded the Malaysian Bar and four of its office-bearers RM59,499 in damages for violating their constitutional rights during the 2022 Walk for Judicial Independence.

The appeal partly succeeded against various authorities, with the court recognising the police's delayed response to the Bar's assembly notification under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 as invalid.

The court dismissed claims of false imprisonment and misconduct in public office, ordering interest on awarded sums but no costs.

PUTRAJAYA, Oct 21 —The Court of Appeal today partly allowed the Malaysian Bar’s appeal over its 2022 Walk for Judicial Independence, awarding RM59,499 in damages to the Bar and four of its office-bearers for violating their constitutional rights in connection with the march.

A three-member panel led by Justice Datuk Dr Choo Kah Sing ordered the government to pay RM19,499 in special damages to the Bar and RM10,000 each to Karen Cheah Yee Lynn, Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab, B. Anand Raj and Murshidah Mustafa, all office-bearers of the Bar when the suit was filed.

The march was held on June 17, 2022, to protest the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) public announcement of an investigation into then Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, now a Federal Court judge.

The Bar regarded the announcement as interference with judicial independence and a breach of the separation of powers.

On March 20 last year, the Kuala Lumpur High Court held that the police had acted ultra vires (beyond their powers) by imposing conditions prohibiting the march, but awarded the Bar only RM1 in nominal damages, a sum proposed by the Bar’s counsel.

The suit was filed on Oct 20, 2022, against six defendants, including former Dang Wangi police chief ACP Noor Dellhan Yahaya, the Inspector-General of Police, the Home Minister and the government, over alleged violations of the plaintiffs’ rights under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012.

The plaintiffs claimed they were prevented from marching with about 500 members and interns from Padang Merbok to Parliament to submit a memorandum to then prime minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob or his representative.

Delivering the judgment, Justice Choo, sitting with Justice Datuk Faizah Jamaludin and Justice Datuk Dr Lim Hock Leng, also set aside the High Court’s finding that Kuala Lumpur City Hall’s (DBKL) consent was required for the assembly at Padang Merbok.

The court held that the Bar’s notification to police under Section 9 of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 was valid.

“A letter from the Dang Wangi district police chief imposing conditions on the march had been issued out of time and was invalid.

“The Bar had notified police on June 3, 2022, but received the response only on June 16, less than 24 hours before the assembly. Under Section 14 of the Act, police must respond with any conditions within three days,” he said.

However, the bench upheld the High Court’s dismissal of the false imprisonment claim, finding that the participants had not been totally deprived of their liberty.

“While participants were prohibited from marching to Parliament House, they were not physically restrained from leaving the area,” Justice Choo said.

The court also upheld the finding that the police were not liable for misfeasance in public office and dismissed the claim for misconduct in public office, as it failed to meet the high subjective threshold required.

The bench further declined to award general, aggravated and exemplary damages. It ordered interest at five per cent per annum on the sums awarded, from the date of the High Court’s judgment until full settlement, with no order as to costs.

The plaintiffs had sought special damages amounting to RM19,449, general damages and aggravated and exemplary costs, in addition to a declaration that their rights had been violated and a declaration that their detention was illegal and wrongful in law. — Bernama

Johari: Malaysia’s chip talent retention remains sustainable despite foreign offers

Loke envisions Transport Expo Asia rivalling LIMA as regional mobility showcase

Sarawak completes integrated rare earth elements roadmap to build ‘super magnet’ industry, says Awang Tengah

上诉法院判决马来西亚律师公会及其四名官员因在 2022 年司法独立游行期间宪法权利受到侵犯而获得 59,499 令吉的赔偿。

针对各级当局的上诉部分获得成功，法院认定警方对律师协会根据 2012 年《和平集会法》发出的集会通知的延迟回应无效。

法院驳回了关于非法监禁和公职人员渎职的指控，判令支付判决金额的利息，但不支付诉讼费用。

布城，10 月 21 日讯——上诉法院今天部分支持了马来西亚律师公会就其 2022 年司法独立游行提出的上诉，判令被告向律师公会及其四名官员赔偿 59,499 令吉，理由是他们在游行中违反了宪法权利。

由法官拿督朱嘉星博士领导的三人小组裁定，政府须向律师公会支付 19,499 令吉的特别赔偿金，并分别向 Karen Cheah Yee Lynn、Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab、B. Anand Raj 和 Murshidah Mustafa 各支付 10,000 令吉的赔偿金，他们都是提起诉讼时律师公会的官员。

这次游行于 2022 年 6 月 17 日举行，旨在抗议马来西亚反贪污委员会 (MACC) 公开宣布对时任上诉法院法官 Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali（现任联邦法院法官）展开调查。

律师协会认为该声明干涉了司法独立，违反了权力分立原则。

去年 3 月 20 日，吉隆坡高等法院裁定，警方通过施加限制禁止游行的条件，其行为属于越权行为，但仅判给律师协会 1 令吉的象征性赔偿金，该金额由律师协会的律师提出。

该诉讼于 2022 年 10 月 20 日提起，被告包括前 Dang Wangi 警察局长 ACP Noor Dellhan Yahaya、警察总监、内政部长和政府，指控他们违反了 2012 年《和平集会法》赋予原告的权利。

原告声称，他们被阻止带领约 500 名成员和实习生从巴东默博克游行到国会，向当时的首相拿督斯里伊斯梅尔·萨布里·雅各布或其代表递交备忘录。

宣判时，朱法官与拿督法伊扎·贾马鲁丁法官和拿督林福龙法官一起，推翻了高等法院关于吉隆坡市政厅（DBKL）同意在梅博广场举行集会的裁决。

法院裁定，律师协会根据 2012 年《和平集会法》第 9 条向警方发出的通知是有效的。

“当旺宜区警察局长发出的对游行施加条件的信函已过时效，无效。

他说：“律师协会于2022年6月3日通知了警方，但直到6月16日才收到回复，距离大会召开不到24小时。根据该法第14条，警方必须在三天内作出任何答复。”

然而，合议庭维持了高等法院驳回非法监禁诉讼的裁决，认为参与者并未被完全剥夺自由。

“虽然禁止参与者游行至国会大厦，但他们并未被强行阻止离开该区域，”朱法官说。

法院还维持了警方不承担公职人员渎职责任的裁决，并驳回了关于公职人员渎职的诉讼请求，因为该诉讼请求未能达到较高的主观门槛。

法庭进一步拒绝判给一般性赔偿金、加重性赔偿金和惩罚性赔偿金。法庭命令自高等法院判决之日起至全部款项付清之日止，按年利率5%支付已判决金额的利息，但不作任何诉讼费用裁定。

原告要求赔偿19,449令吉的特殊损失、一般损失以及加重和惩罚性诉讼费用，此外还要求法院宣告其权利受到侵犯，并宣告其拘留非法且违反法律。——马新社

乔哈里：尽管面临海外邀约，马来西亚芯片人才的留存率依然可持续

Loke设想亚洲交通博览会将与伦敦国际交通展览会（LIMA）相媲美，成为区域交通运输业的盛会。

阿旺登加表示，砂拉越已完成稀土元素综合发展路线图，旨在打造“超级磁铁”产业。