Syahredzan said he was disappointed that police were still insisting organisers get permits to hold meetings to allow people to express themselves on public interest issues.
“It has been 10 years since the Peaceful Assembly Act came into force, but the police are still taking the traditional approach,” he told FMT.
Dang Wangi district police chief Noor Dellhan Yahaya recently said police would question about 30 people who took part in last week’s Turun Malaysia protest in Kuala Lumpur to call for the lowering of prices for essential goods.
About 500 people gathered at a shopping centre but were stopped from marching to Dataran Merdeka.
Last month, police prevented the Malaysian Bar from conducting its “walk for judicial independence”, with policemen barricading lawyers at Padang Merbok.
Syahredzan noted that the law was amended under the Pakatan Harapan administration to shorten the 10-day notice period to five.
“Even if a notice is not given, that does not make the assembly unlawful or illegal,” he said.
In April 2014, a three-member Court of Appeal bench held that Section 9 (5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act, which criminalises the organiser’s failure to give the 10-day notice before a gathering, was unreasonable.
Judge Mah Weng Kwai said it amounted to an effective prohibition against urgent and spontaneous assemblies.
Mah said the right to organise and assemble peacefully could only be restricted reasonably and not prohibited, as defined in Article 10 (2) (b) of the Federal Constitution.
He also said any traffic violation or dislocation of business activities which breached public safety and security could be adequately dealt with by the police under existing laws such as the Road Transport Act and the Penal Code.
Another judge, Ariff Mohd Yusof, said non-compliance in giving notice could not be a basis for prosecution as it involved a fundamental right.
Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, who retired as a judge last year, said provisions to penalise or discourage peaceful assemblies had to be readily struck down since Malaysia was a signatory to international conventions on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.
However, in October 2015, another Court of Appeal bench unanimously ruled, in the case of Public Prosecutor vs Yuneswaran Ramaraj, that Section 9 (5) of the Act was consistent with the Federal Constitution and that any organiser must therefore give notice to the police prior to the date of assembly.
Syahredzan said the law was not settled yet and police should be “less enthusiastic” in enforcing it.
Another lawyer, Salim Bashir, said enforcers of legislation were as subject to the law as anyone else.
“They are merely servants of the law. Police should not frustrate members of the public from exercising their right through peaceful means even against those in power,” he said.
He warned that police were subject to civil suits since “the government can sue and be sued”.
“Ironically, it is the taxpayers who ultimately pay damages when a court delivers a judgment,” he added.