Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©The Star (Used by permission)
by M. Mageswari

KUALA LUMPUR: Businessman Syed Akbar Ali, accused of posting a seditious comment on a news portal, will now stand trial after the Sessions Court here ruled that his charge was not defective.

In her decision on Wednesday, Judge Rozana Ali Yusoff said the court could not find any defect in the charge framed against the former banker.

"The principle of law is very clear as argued by the prosecution, for me to dismiss the preliminary objection (PO) raised by the defence counsel," Rozana said.

She set Friday for mention to set his trial date.

Syed Akbar, 48, who is also a writer, had on May 6 claimed trial to posting the comment in Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Raja Kamarudin’s article titled Malaysia’s organised crime syndicate: All roads lead to Putrajaya.

He was said to have committed the offence at his family business premise at Zeenath Begum Jewellers Sdn Bhd in Jalan Masjid India at about 2.59pm on June 5 last year.

If convicted, he can be fined a maximum of RM5,000 or jailed up to three years or both under Section 4 (1) of the Sedition Act 1948.

In asking the court to overrule the PO, DPP Ishak Mohd Yusoff submitted that the prosecution did not need to specify which part or parts of the alleged statement (comment) was seditious.

He argued that the alleged statement must be looked at in its totality and not in isolation.

"To underline which part of the statement published by the accused is said to be seditious would suggest that it be read in isolation, and that would be contrary to the principle of law," he said.

DPP Ishak submitted that the prosecution did not have to specify the seditious tendency as evidence would be adduced during the trial.

"At the end of the prosecution's case, we will submit which of the six limbs under Section 3(1) of the Sedition Act we are relying on to show the seditious tendency for this case.

"To decide it in context, the evidence must be tested with the alleged statement," he said.

DPP Ishak further contended that it would be the court's duty to ascertain whether the statement was seditious or not upon reading its content later.

He said the test was more on whether the particulars provided in the charge had given the accused reasonably sufficient notice to answer to his charge.

"We have provided the date, time and place and the whole (seditious) statement was incorporated in the charge to fulfil this requirement. It is enough for him to give directions to his lawyer to prepare for his defence," he said.

Lawyer Ashok Kandiah raised an objection saying that the charge was groundless and that the court has to use its discretion to discharge his client or else Syed Akbar would only be embarrassed.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed