The stance of the government in respect of the anti-corruption gathering scheduled to be held in Kuala Lumpur on 25.1.2025 is most regretted, particularly given the fact that there is no evidence of the said assembly being a threat to national security and that the objective of the said gathering is to protest against corruption, a key priority of this unity government.
The insistence of several ministers that the organisers of the said gathering must get the prior approval of the purported owner of the place of assembly (in this case, DBKL) has been severely criticised, and rightly so, for being unreasonable and mere excuses to hinder the gathering.
It is unclear if DBKL is the owner of Dataran Merdeka as it is clearly a public space for the use of the public.
Moreover, many have rightly pointed out how unreasonable it is to expect the owner of a place of assembly to always approve such gatherings which goes against one of the main objects of the Peaceful Assembly Act, 2012 (‘the said Act’) as stated in section 2(b) thereof as follows:
“2. The objects of this Act are to ensure—
(a) …
(b) that the exercise of the right to organize assemblies or to participate in assemblies, peaceably and without arms, is subject only to restrictions deemed necessary or expedient in a democratic society in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof or public order, including the protection of the rights and freedoms of other persons.
With respect, it can hardly be said that it is necessary to restrict an anti-corruption gathering at a public place like Dataran Merdeka.
In the circumstances, the requirement in section 11 of the said Act that the consent of the owner of a place of assembly is required when that place is clearly a public place is certainly unreasonable although the position may be different if the place of assembly is a private land, which is not the case here.
Pakatan Harapan leaders should not forget that section 9(1) of the said Act was amended in 2019 after it came into power to reduce the notice period to be given by an organiser of an assembly to the police from 10 to 5 days, obviously as part of its reform agenda as the said Act had long been criticised as being draconian and an affront to democracy.
As such, the insistence of the same PH leaders today that the consent of the owner of the place of assembly must be obtained before the assembly is held is certainly regressive and contrary to the government’s reformist image.
In fact, the government should seriously consider amending the said section 11 and other related laws to ensure that consent by owners of places of assembly is not unreasonably withheld which would be consistent with its reformist agenda and the constitutional right to assemble.
In light of the above, the government should, instead, indicate its encouragement of the assembly on 25.1.2025 which would, undoubtedly, be a major factor that would be taken into account by DBKL if it were to consider giving its consent for the said assembly to be held at Dataran Merdeka (assuming DBKL is the owner of Dataran Merdeka) since DBKL is an agency directly under the purview of the Federal Territories Ministry.
The assembly should be allowed to proceed as part of a healthy democracy and the government should not be seen to obstruct this.
Dated this 23rd of January, 2025.
RAMKARPAL SINGH
MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT
BUKIT GELUGOR
