Hak untuk berhimpun dengan aman — Syahredzan Johan

Sumber: Sinar Harian

OLEH SYAHREDZAN JOHAN

Syahredzan Johan - file pic

Syahredzan Johan – file pic

DI negara ini, kebebasan untuk berhimpun adalah hak yang dilindungi oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Semua rakyat Malaysia mempunyai hak untuk berhimpun tanpa senjata.

Hak ini sememangnya bukan mutlak. Perlembagaan Persekutuan membenarkan hak ini untuk disekat oleh Parlimen. Parlimen boleh menggubal undang-undang yang mengenakan sekatan yang perlu bagi kepentingan keselamatan Persekutuan atau ketenteraman awam. Namun demikian, apa-apa sekatan yang dikenakan harus berkadar dengan tujuan sekatan itu dikenakan. Sekatan yang keterlaluan, melangkaui tujuan kepentingan keselamatan Persekutuan atau ketenteraman awam adalah tidak berperlembagaan.

Akta Perhimpunan Aman (APA) adalah undang-undang yang utama berkenaan dengan perhimpunan aman di Malaysia. Harus diingati bahawa Akta ini hanya mengendalikan perhimpunan aman tanpa senjata dan bukannya rusuhan, protes ganas dan sebagainya. Oleh itu, sekiranya terdapat apa-apa perhimpunan yang mana pemprotes membuat ugutan untuk memudaratkan orang atau merosakkan harta benda, maka perhimpunan itu bukan lagi sebuah perhimpunan aman dan pihak berkuasa sewajarnya mengambil tindakan di bawah Kanun Keseksaan.

Sebelum ini di bawah Seksyen 27 Akta Polis, penganjur sebuah perhimpunan seharusnya mendapatkan permit daripada pegawai yang menjaga daerah polis (OCPD) di mana perhimpunan itu akan diadakan. Sekiranya suatu perhimpunan dilangsungkan tanpa permit, maka perhimpunan itu menjadi perhimpunan haram dan sesiapa yang menghadiri perhimpunan itu melakukan kesalahan. Read more

The right to peaceful assembly — Syahredzan Johan

Source: The Star Online

BY SYAHREDZAN JOHAN

Syahredzan Johan - file pic

Syahredzan Johan – file pic

Unlike the Police Act before this, the Peaceful Assembly Act allows assemblies without prior notification.

IN Malaysia, freedom of assembly is a right that is protected by the Federal Constitution. All citizens have the right to assemble peacefully without arms.

However, the right to peaceful assembly is not absolute. Under the Federal Constitution, the right to peaceful assembly may be restricted by Parliament.

Parliament may enact laws that impose restrictions as Parliament deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or public order. However, whatever restrictions imposed by Parliament must be proportionate to the purpose for which the restriction was imposed in the first place.

The Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) is the primary law that governs peaceful assemblies in Malaysia. It must first be borne in mind that the Act only facilitates peaceful assemblies without arms, not violent protests, riots and the like.

So if there is a protest where the protesters threaten harm to persons or damage to property, then it is not a peaceful assembly and should be dealt with as a crime under the Penal Code. Read more

The burkini ban and human rights — Syahredzan Johan

Source: The Star Online

BY SYAHREDZAN JOHAN

YOU may have read news about the “burkini ban” controversy in some French towns.

The “burkini” is a type of swimwear that covers the whole body of the wearer, except for the hands and feet. It was designed for the Muslim female who wants to wear something light that can be used for swimming, yet at the same time is in accordance with the traditional Islamic concept of modesty.

The controversy began when the town of Cannes prohibited the use of the burkini. The reasons given were that the clothing has a possible link to “Islamic extremism”. Other towns in France followed suit and imposed a similar ban.

This resulted in fines issued against many women for wearing the burkini.

The accusation was that they did not wear “an outfit respecting good morals and secularism”, the bedrock of the French republic. Meanwhile, the mayor of the town of Nice claimed that the wearing of the burkini to be an “unacceptable provocative act”.

Politicians followed suit, joining the chorus of irrationality against the wearing of the swimwear. There were also reports of women being forced to take off the burkini in public with the ban extended to other types of “modest attire”. Read more

The laws of peaceful assembly — Syahredzan Johan

Source: The Star

Syahredzan Johan is a young lawyer and partner of a legal firm in Kuala Lumpur. Pic taken from the Star.

Syahredzan Johan is a young lawyer and partner of a legal firm in Kuala Lumpur. Pic taken from the Star.

According to the Federal Constitution, the right to assembly peacefully may be restricted by Parliament. Parliament enacts laws that impose restrictions, as Parliament deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or public order.

However, whatever restrictions imposed by Parliament must be reasonable as well as proportionate to the purpose the restriction was imposed in the first place.

There must be a nexus between the restriction and national security or public order. It also follows that arguments that peaceful assembly should not be allowed because it will inconvenience others is not a good reason to restrict freedom of assembly.

Previously under Section 27 of the Police Act, the organiser of an assembly must first obtain a license or ‘permit’ from the Officer in Charge of a Police District (OCPD) of that district before holding an assembly. Read more

The NSC Act will soon come into force — Syahredzan Johan

Source: The Star Online

BY SYAHREDZAN JOHAN

Source: Mkini

Source: Mkini

The much criticised National Security Council (NSC) Act will come into force on Aug 1 2016.

The NSC bill was previously passed by the Dewan Rakyat and the Dewan Negara.

In the normal process, after a bill is passed by Parliament it will then be presented to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for royal assent. This is according to the provisions of the Federal Constitution.

The bill must receive royal assent within 30 days from the date of its presentation to the King.

In most instances, bills would receive royal assent within the 30 days.

However, the NSC bill was extraordinary in that it became law without express royal assent. This has never happened before.

Of course, according to the Federal Constitution if a bill does not receive royal assent within the 30 days, the bill will automatically become law.

But the very fact royal assent was not expressly given for the bill raises certain questions. Read more

Jadi akta tanpa perkenan Agong — Syahredzan Johan

Sumber: Sinar Harian

OLEH SYAHREDZAN JOHAN

NSC_Act_2016Suatu Rang Undang-undang (RUU) telah pun diluluskan oleh Dewan Rakyat dan Dewan Negara sebelum ini yang dikenali sebagai RUU Majlis Keselamatan Negara (MKN).

Mengikut proses biasa, suatu RUU selepas diluluskan oleh Parlimen akan dikemukakan kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk diperkenankan. Ini menurut Perkara 66 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

RUU tersebut harus mendapat perkenan Yang di-Pertuan Agong dalam masa 30 hari dari tarikh ia dikemukakan. Tetapi, RUU MKN ini adalah luar biasa kerana ia menjadi akta walaupun tanpa perkenan Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Ini tidak pernah berlaku sebelum ini.

Menurut Perkara 66(4A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan, jika sesuatu RUU tidak diperkenankan oleh YDPA dalam masa 30 hari dari tarikh RUU tersebut dikemukakan, maka RUU seolah-olah diperkenankan oleh YDPA dan menjadi akta, secara ‘automatik’.

Ini boleh ditafsirkan bahawa YDPA tidak bersetuju dengan Akta MKN ini. Malahan, Majlis Raja-Raja sebelum ini menyatakan bahawa beberapa peruntukan dalam RUU tersebut harus diperhalusi.

Selepas Majlis Raja-Raja membuat pengumuman sedemikian, Peguam Negara sendiri menyatakan bahawa beberapa peruntukan RUU MKN ini akan dikaji semula. Namun, seperti yang disahkan oleh peguam negara sendiri melalui laporan media, tidak ada pindaan yang dibuat kepada RUU MKN yang menjadi akta ini.

Kita tidak tahu apakah sebab YDPA dan Majlis Raja-Raja berbuat sedemikian. Tetapi apa yang kita tahu, banyak pihak telah mengkritik undang-undang ini. Read more

Maximum jail for insult of Johor prince ‘excessive’, says lawyer

Source: The Malay Mail Online

20160607_TMJ_620_464_100

Labourer Muhammad Amirul Azwan Mohd Shakri (centre), 19, was sentenced to a total of 14 years’ jail for posting insulting comments against the Tunku Mahkota of Johor, Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim. — Bernama pic

KUALA LUMPUR, June 8 — The Sessions Court erred in imposing a maximum one-year imprisonment sentence on a youth for insulting the Johor crown prince on Facebook, a lawyer said, claiming it appeared the court had not taken several mitigating factors into consideration.

Civil liberties lawyer Syahredzan Johan said 19-year-old labourer Muhammad Amirul Azwan Mohd Shakri, who was unrepresented, should have been entitled to a discount in the sentence as the young man had pleaded guilty to charges under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 on the improper use of network facilities or network service.

“Instead of taking into account his guilty plea, the learned Sessions Court judge imposed the maximum sentence for the offence,” Syahredzan wrote on his Facebook page.

“This is clearly an error on the part of the Sessions Court judge. To say the sentence is excessive is an understatement. I am not sure if this is his first offence, but if it is, it should also be taken into account by the learned Sessions Court judge.

“Other mitigating factors such as his age and the fact that there is no ‘victim’ in this crime appear to not have been taken into account by the Sessions Court judge,” the lawyer added. Read more

Hak rakyat untuk ke luar negara – Syahredzan Johan

Sumber: Sinar Harian

OLEH SYAHREDZAN JOHAN

Sakib noted that it is a privilege to be able to have a Malaysian passport rather than a right. — AFP pic

Immigration DG Sakib noted that it is a privilege to be able to have a Malaysian passport rather than a right. — AFP pic

DILAPORKAN sesiapa sahaja yang memburukkan kerajaan boleh dihalang daripada meninggalkan negara ini selama tiga tahun. Ini menurut suatu laporan yang memetik Ketua Pengarah Imigresen bahawa terdapatnya peruntukan tersebut, sambil menegaskan bahawa memiliki pasport Malaysia adalah satu keistimewaan dan bukan satu hak.

Kerajaan, katanya, mempunyai budi bicara untuk mengeluar, menangguh atau membatalkan pasport seseorang.

Perkara ini juga disahkan oleh Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, yang dilaporkan telah mengatakan bahawa perkara itu bawah kuasa pengarah Jabatan Imigresen memandangkan kebenaran seseorang untuk ke luar negara merupakan satu keistimewaan dan bukannya hak.

“Kuasa untuk membenarkan orang keluar masuk dalam negara bawah pengarah imigresen dan dia juga yang keluarkan pasport. Ia keistimewaan dan bukan hak.”

Timbalan Menteri tersebut juga dilaporkan berkata bahawa seseorang yang ingin ke luar negara seharusnya memeriksa dengan Jabatan Imigresen terlebih dahulu untuk mengetahui status mereka. Menurutnya, kerajaan tidak punya obligasi untuk memaklumkan kepada seseorang tentang apa-apa halangan ke luar negara dan juga sebab-sebab mereka dihalang. Read more

Undang-undang apa yang diguna untuk sekat ke luar negara, tanya peguam

Sumber: Malaysiakini

Pic taken from The Star Online

Pic taken from The Star Online

Undang-undang khusus yang mana satu yang digunakan oleh kerajaan untuk menghalang rakyat daripada meninggalkan negara ini?

Ini adalah persoalan asas yang masih belum dijawab, kata peguam Syahredzan Johan.

Beliau mengulas kenyataan Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Nur Jazlan Mohamed semalam bahawa halangan perjalanan tidak akan dikenakan ke atas pengkritik kerajaan, tetapi hanya terhadap mereka yang didakwa melanggar Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Dalam satu catatan di Facebook hari ini, Syahredzan ‘penjelasan’ itu masih tidak menjawab persoalan asas – di bawah undang-undang mana yang mereka menghalang rakyat ke luar negara?

Seperti yang dinyatakan oleh ramai pihak, termasuk Presiden Majlis Peguam Steven Thiru, hak untuk ke luar negara adalah hak perlembagaan yang dijamin di bawah Perkara 5 (1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan, katanya.

Ini, katanya, adalah tafsiran undang-undang oleh mahkamah tertinggi dalam kes Lee Kwan Woh lwn PP. Read more

Your KiniGuide to overseas travel, and how one gets blacklisted

Source: Malaysiakini

Last Sunday, Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah was barred from leaving Malaysia.

She joins a list of more than 800,000 people who have been prevented from travelling overseas since 2011. However, unlike many of them, Maria was not why she was not allowed to leave the country.

In this installment of KiniGuide, we explore your right to overseas travel, and where the government can or cannot restrict those rights.

Wait. Overseas travel is a right?

Lawyer Syahredzan Johan ― MMO File pic

Lawyer Syahredzan Johan ― MMO File pic

Yes. According to lawyer Syahredzan Johan, this comes under Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution, read together with Article 9 that provides for the freedom of movement.

Article 5(1) states: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.”

Syahredzan (photo) said the courts have interpreted ‘personal liberty’ to include overseas travel.

This does not amount to a blank cheque to go on that dream holiday, though. What it does mean is that if the government wants to restrict your ability to travel overseas, it would have to do so by passing laws to that effect.

However, the Immigration director-general Sakib Kusmi seems to have taken a different view on the matter. Read more