In their application, Azrie Situ, 24, Jemmy Liku, Markus Situ, 32, Erick Jack William, 29, and Joseph Koilis, 29, raised that legal arguments which are going to be raised in their defence are complex in nature and that such complex legal arguments are matters best heard and determined by the High Court.
Their counsel Tengku Ahmad Fuad, who appeared together with counsel Arthur Chin, also told Judge Datuk Nurchaya Arshad that they were challenging the definition of 'seditious tendency'.
The four had, on March 16 this year, pleaded not guilty in the Sessions Court to having pamphlets with seditious content at 9.50am on Feb 1, this year at the weekly Tamu in Tuaran.
Erick is accused of having 91 pieces of the seditious pamphlets, Joseph 13, Azrie five and Jemmy one.
The offence, under Section 4(2) of the Sedition Act, carries a fine of up to RM2,000 or a jail term of up to 18 months, or both, on conviction with the offending publications to be seized and destroyed.
The trial of the activists has been put off in the Sessions Court pending the outcome of their application in the High Court.
In Thursday's proceeding Tengku Ahmad argued that speaking up about Sabah's rights within Malaysia can never be seditious.
"(And) we are challenging the definition of 'seditious tendency'.
"What we are saying is that if you questioned Sabahan's rights openly...that category
of speech is incapable of criminalisation under the Sedition Act," said Tengku Ahmad.
The court also ordered the prosecution to give the defence the list of words claimed to be seditious in the document by Oct 7 and ordered both applicants and the prosecution to tender their respective submission on Oct 21.
Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Azreezi Nordin appeared for the prosecution.
- By Jo Ann Mool
No comments:
Post a Comment