Malaysia to Amend Peaceful Assembly Act, May Drop Court Review
The Malaysian government has taken a significant step toward reforming the nation's assembly laws, announcing its intention to amend the Peaceful Asse...
The Malaysian government has taken a significant step toward reforming the nation's assembly laws, announcing its intention to amend the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) and potentially discontinue a planned judicial review of a Federal Court ruling that declared a key provision unconstitutional.
In a press conference following the weekly Cabinet meeting in Putrajaya on January 14, Communication Minister Datuk Fahmi Fadzil revealed that the Cabinet had agreed "in policy" to proceed with amendments to the PAA. This decision, reached last week, marks a pivotal development in the ongoing discourse surrounding freedom of assembly in Malaysia.
Minister Fahmi elaborated on the implications of this policy shift, stating, "Today the Cabinet agreed to convey their decision to the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) that because the PAA will be amended, it may no longer be appropriate for it to continue with filing a judicial review." He emphasized that this decision has been formalized and that subsequent actions are expected from the attorney general, indicating a coordinated governmental approach to the matter.
The provision in question, Section 9(5) of the PAA, was declared unconstitutional by a five-member bench of the Federal Court last year. The bench, led by then-Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, delivered a unanimous ruling that was widely applauded by civil society organizations and human rights advocates. In her judgment, Justice Tengku Maimun asserted that Section 9(5) imposed penalties exceeding the permissible limits under Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution, which enshrines the fundamental rights to freedom of speech, assembly, and association.
The constitutional challenge was initiated by activist and former Muda secretary-general Amir Hariri Abd Hadi, who faced charges for allegedly failing to notify authorities before organizing a protest in 2022 concerning the littoral combat ship issue. Amir's legal battle brought to light the contentious nature of Section 9(5), which critics argue imposes undue restrictions on the right to peaceful assembly.
In a recent development, Amir disclosed that the AGC had filed an application to review the Federal Court's ruling under Rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995. He expressed concern that this move contradicted Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's professed commitment to substantive reform, highlighting the tension between governmental actions and public expectations for progressive change.
The Cabinet's decision to amend the PAA rather than pursue a judicial review suggests a strategic pivot toward legislative reform over protracted legal battles. This approach aligns with broader calls for the government to uphold its reform agenda, particularly in areas concerning civil liberties and democratic freedoms. By opting to revise the legislation, the administration appears to acknowledge the constitutional deficiencies identified by the Federal Court and seeks to address them through parliamentary means.
Minister Fahmi's announcement underscores the government's recognition of the need to balance regulatory frameworks with constitutional guarantees. The planned amendments to the PAA are expected to refine the provisions governing public assemblies, ensuring they comply with constitutional standards while maintaining public order and safety. This move could potentially enhance Malaysia's standing in international human rights assessments and foster a more conducive environment for civic engagement.
The decision also reflects the evolving judicial landscape in Malaysia, where the courts have increasingly played a proactive role in safeguarding constitutional rights. The Federal Court's ruling on Section 9(5) exemplifies this trend, reinforcing the judiciary's independence and its capacity to check legislative overreach. The government's responsive stance may signal a growing alignment between the executive and judicial branches in upholding the rule of law.
As the government moves forward with the amendment process, stakeholders, including civil society groups, legal experts, and the public, will be closely monitoring the developments. The specifics of the proposed amendments will be crucial in determining whether they genuinely address the concerns raised by the Federal Court and advance the protection of assembly rights. Transparency and inclusive consultation in the legislative process will be essential to ensure that the reforms are robust and widely accepted.
In conclusion, the Malaysian government's commitment to amending the Peaceful Assembly Act represents a significant step toward reconciling national laws with constitutional imperatives. By potentially withdrawing the judicial review application, the administration demonstrates a willingness to engage in meaningful reform and uphold the principles of democracy and human rights. This development not only impacts the legal framework for assemblies but also reinforces the broader narrative of Malaysia's ongoing journey toward greater political and civil freedoms.
