Hindraf anti-ISA rally in Penang (UPDATED)Posted: May 13, 2008
Originally written on May 12, 2008 at 10:47 pm:
PENANG: All the seven people who were arrested on Sunday for participating in a gathering at Gurney Drive here have been released.
George Town OCPD Asst Comm Azam Abd Hamid said five of them were released on Sunday night and the remaining two at about 9am Monday, adding that they were all released on police bail.
“Any action to be taken against them under Section 90 of the Police Act 1967 will later be decided by the deputy public prosecutor,” he said.
The seven comprising a blogger, a teacher, and members from Suaram, Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA and Hindraf were among those rounded up after the gathering, which was attended by about 40 people.
Suaram Penang’s Lau Shu Shi and Teh Chun Hong, who were the last to be released, were nabbed at about 1pm on Sunday for attending the gathering as well as for alleged disorderly conduct at the Patani Road police station.
Lau said female police personnel arrested her while she was at the police station to make a report over the abuse of power during the Gurney Drive gathering.
Teh said he was about to use his camera handphone to snap a picture of Lau being arrested when another policeman arrested him on the order of a police officer.
Both of them were speaking to reporters outside the George Town district police headquarters shortly after their release Monday morning.
Original article here.
This Hindraf rally was also a protest against the ISA. Susan has a post and some photos on this incident here.
I received an email from SUARAM a few hours back with an update on the arrest.
Lau Shu Shi has been charged for 2 offences which are under Section 27 and Section 90 of Police Act. Meanwhile, Teh Chun Hong charged under Section 90 of Police Act. They were required to attend to the court on 21st and 26th May 2008.
I have no idea what the charges are under those Sections of the Police Act. In fact, I couldn’t even find ANY information on the Police Act at all! I went to The Malaysia’s Government Official Portal, and I still couldn’t find any information on it at all. Are we all supposed to be lawyers before we know what people are being charged for? Or was it just me?
But whatever it is, it doesn’t seem right. After all, it WAS a peaceful rally. And judging from the photos on Susan’s blog, there were more police than protesters.
Honestly, don’t the FRUs have other more pressing matters to deal with?
I’ve just found out from Anil Netto’s blog here about the charges against the two SUARAM activists:
Shu Shi told me she is required to report to the police on 21 May to find out about a possible charge under Section 90 of the Police Act. Section 90 covers disorderly conduct in police stations and states that “any person who, in a police station behaves in a riotous, indecent, disorderly or insulting manner shall be guilty of an offence under this Act”.
She also has to report on 24 May pertaining to a possible charge under Section 27 of the Police Act. This section is about police powers to regulate assemblies, meetings and processions including the requirement for organisers to apply for a licence for an assembly.
He also has a short video of how Teh Chun Hong was detained in front of the police station. Embarassing to think that this is the way the police behave.