Sunday, May 20, 2012

MP: Burger protest infringes at least three laws

Source: (By Koh Jun Lin, 18/5/2012)
Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng said he could find no law that allows the ‘burger protest’ in front of Bersih co-chairperson S Ambiga’s house, but has instead found three laws that render such acts illegal. “I as a lawmaker could not find any legal provision that would allow the causing of nuisance in front of an individual’s house,” said Lim of the anti-Bersih protest on May 10.
He quoted Section 46 of the Street, Drainage and Building Act that bars the placing of “obstructions” in public places, with a penalty of a fine up to RM500 on the first offence. He added that according to Section 110 of the Road Transport Act, anything placed on a road or interfering with the flow of traffic shall be liable of a fine not exceeding RM1,000. Lim also quoted Section 80 of Local Government Act that compels local authorities to take action to “remove, put down and abate” public nuisances.
The DAP parliamentarian was speaking at a press conference after Pakatan Rakyat MPs handed the mayor of Kuala Lumpur Ahmad Fuad Ismail a protest memorandum this morning asking him whether the ‘burger protest’ by the NGO Ikhlas was illegal, and if so what action would be taken.
He and Cheras MP Tan Kok Wai, Titiwangsa PAS Youth chief Suhaimi Abdul Aziz handed the memorandum over to the mayor’s aide, Mohd Aznan Mohd Zain. Also present with the delegation at the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) headquarters were Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar’s political secretary Fahmi Fadzil on her behalf, and DAP Seputeh division deputy chairperson Khong Kam Yin, representing the constituency’s MP Teresa Kok.
Lim added that if the mayor had said the act is permissible, Kuala Lumpur can turn into a “lawlessness city”, and both politicians and celebrities will be powerless to act against stalkers outside their homes.
Meanwhile, Fahmi said there should not be double-standards, in pointed reference to Occupy Dataran activists being evicted from Dataran Merdeka while the ‘burger protest’ was allowed to proceed. When asked what if Bersih 3.0 and and the Occupy Dataran movement are also construed as a “nuisance” by the authorities, Fahmi countered that ample notice had been given ahead of the pro-electoral reform rally. “The time was one month between its announcment to (the day of the rally on) April 28, so there was a suitable timeframe for all parties to make preperations, whether to hold sales or to attend the rally. “Secondly, the Bersih 3.0 venue is a public place, compared to Ambiga’s house. That is a personal attack, whereas Bersih 3.0 was not.” Responding to questions on whether DBKL should “chase away” WargaAMAN if it erect thosai stalls in front of the Deputy IGP’s residence, he said, “If it is against by-laws, then they should enforce the laws fairly.”
The NGO originally wanted to set up the stalls on Sunday after DIGP Khalid Abu Bakar had said the ‘burger protest’ had not violated any laws, but had reportedly cancelled the plans in response to calls not to engage in a tit-for-tat response with anti-Bersih protestors.
Related news: DAP: How is butt-flashing legal?

No comments: