ADUN SPEAKS | Yesterday, the High Court in Kuala Lumpur denied bail for Gadek assemblyperson and Malacca state executive councillor G Saminathan.

Judicial Commissioner Ahmad Shahrir Mohd Salleh decided to stick to Section 388 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to deny bail for Saminathan (above).

Ahmad Shahrir said that since he was bound by the punishment meted out in the CPC on the maximum penalty of death or life imprisonment, he was legally bound to reject the bail.

Since the offences committed by Saminathan were linked to the LTTE, a terrorist organisation gazetted by the Ministry of Home Affairs, there was no reason for him to question the validity of the minister’s gazette that listed it as a terrorist organisation.

There was much hope that, given the earlier High Court judgment by judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali (below) that stipulated that it was within the jurisdiction of the courts to give bail, that Saminathan might be freed.

This decision gave confidence to the family members of those detained under Sosma of the possibility of earlier release under bail.

Before this landmark judgment, it was not even possible to think of bail for those charged under Sosma.

However, in the case of Saminathan, Ahmed Shahrir made no reference to the earlier High Court decision, nor did he make any reference to the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma).

There was no mention of the word Sosma at all in the judgment denying bail.

His focus was on the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), which provides a maximum punishment of death or life imprisonment for those charged under Section 388 of CPC.

Thus, under the CPC, there is no bail because the offences committed are related to links with the LTTE that was gazetted as the terrorist organisation by the Minister of Home Affairs.

LTTE gazetted as a terrorist organisation

Although Judicial Commissioner Ahmad Shahrir made references to the fact that the LTTE might be a defunct organisation in other countries, the fact that it was gazetted as a terrorist organisation sufficed for him to consider it as a terrorist outfit.

He said it was up to the policymakers to consider whether an organisation should be gazetted or de-gazetted. It was not certainly up to the court.

Ahmad Shahrir touched on two related points to come to his judgment in denying the bail.

First, he said that since the CPC prescribed extreme punishment for terrorist offences, death or life imprisonment, these were non-bailable offences.

Second, Saminathan was arrested for terrorist activities, linked to the LTTE, a gazetted terrorist organisation, so he had no choice but to deny the bail.

It is strange that there have been cases charged under the Penal Code but allowed bail, including to those charged with murder.

But Saminathan is being treated worse than a murderer for the mere allegation of possession of some materials linking him to the long-gone LTTE.

In the ultimate sense, it is not about the court judgment or Sosma but whether the Pakatan Harapan government is willing to tolerate and condone the obnoxious laws of the country, that were supposed to have been removed per the election manifesto.

P RAMASAMY is the state assemblyperson for Perai. He is also deputy chief minister II of Penang.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.