<figure id="attachment_3067912" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-3067912" style="width: 1600px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" class="size-full wp-image-3067912" src="https://media.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/ee297bb0-perhimpunan-sogo-24525-2.webp" alt="perhimpunan sogo" width="1600" height="1000" /><figcaption id="caption-attachment-3067912" class="wp-caption-text">Lawyer Andrew Khoo said peaceful assemblies should be allowed and that the police should facilitate them as required by law.</figcaption></figure>
PETALING JAYA: A lawyer has proposed that the government designate areas for peaceful assemblies nationwide, following the Federal Court’s decision yesterday that the penalty for failing to notify the police of proposed rallies is unconstitutional.
Andrew Khoo, a former co-chair of the Bar Council’s constitutional law committee, said the decision of the apex court affirmed the freedom to peacefully assemble.
&#8220;After 13 years of the coming into force of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, it is well past due for the state and federal governments to designate convenient and easily accessible places in every town and city in the country to hold peaceful assemblies,&#8221; he said in a statement.
Khoo added that the proposed &#8220;maidan&#8221; or public squares should be places where the voice of the people is heard, not feared.
&#8220;Maidan&#8221; is a term of Persian origin referring to designated open spaces where the public can gather and exercise their right to assemble.
Khoo said peaceful assemblies should be allowed, and that the police should facilitate them as required by law.
&#8220;The proper legal recourse lies in the Penal Code for any violation of peace and order by the organisers or participants of the assembly,&#8221; he said.
The Federal Court had unanimously ruled that it is unconstitutional to criminalise the failure to notify the police five days in advance of holding a peaceful assembly.
Outgoing Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, delivering the decision of a five-member panel, said Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 imposes a punishment that exceeds the limits permitted under Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution.
Article 10(1)(b) guarantees the freedom of speech, assembly, and association.
She said the section was &#8220;a disproportionate intervention&#8221; and amounted to a prohibition rather than a restriction of that right.
The decision stemmed from a constitutional challenge brought by former Muda secretary-general Amir Hadi, who was charged in 2022 with failing to give the police five days&#8217; notice before organising a protest outside the Sogo shopping complex in Kuala Lumpur.
Home minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail said yesterday that his ministry would examine the Federal Court&#8217;s ruling.
The ministry is expected to table an amendment to Section 11 of the Act, which requires organisers of assemblies to obtain the consent of the location’s owner or occupier, at the next parliamentary sitting.

MatchPoint Times

Lawyer moots designated areas for peaceful assemblies

Andrew Khoo says the proposed ‘maidan’ or public squares should be places where the people’s voice is heard, not feared.

PN tuntut butir pembangunan Ambalat, dokumen Triti Sulawesi dibahas

German government not holding talks on TKMS stake