KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 30 — Putrajaya’s failed attempt today to get Bersih 2.0 to pay for the damages from its 2012 rally is a vindication of the group and Malaysians’ right to freedom of assembly, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said.

Ambiga, who was the electoral watchdog’s co-chairman during the April gathering, noted that the High Court, when dismissing Putrajaya’s suit today, had pointed out that the government could not prove that the damages were solely caused by rally participants.

“The judge made some significant comments on the contributory conduct of the police to the damage… as far as I’m concerned, it is a vindication of Bersih and of the people’s right to assemble,” Ambiga told reporters after the ruling today.

“The judge made it clear whatever it is the government has to prove the case against the particular individual,” she said.

Earlier today, Justice Datuk John Louis O’Hara ruled that while Section 6 (2)(g) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) 2012 is constitutional, contrary to the group’s assertion, he stressed that the government had been unable to prove that those who attended the mammoth gathering had been entirely to blame for the damages to public property.

Justice O’Hara then dismissed the government’s claim for special damages of RM110,543.27 in property damages as the “acts and omission of the cops contributed to the damage”.

“Vicarious liability does not affect the organisers based upon the facts and evidence in this case,” said O’Hara.

On May 23, 2012, the government sued Bersih 2.0 under Section 6 (2)(g) of the PAA, claiming compensation for alleged damages to property — including 15 police vehicles — during the rally.

The government sought for special damages of RM110,543.27 from the then Bersih 2.0’s co-chairs Ambiga and A. Samad Said and 13 other committee members.

“But let me make one thing clear, Bersih has never supported violence... we have always said that if someone commits an act of violence, they must face the full force of the law,” asserted Ambiga.

The group’s current chairman, Maria Chin Abdullah, added that the judgement is “positive” but reiterated that the legal process was “unnecessary”

“It was a waste of public funds, time and effort... because it is already guaranteed in the Federal Constitution that we have this right to assemble,” said Chin.

“If law and order was managed properly that day itself we wouldn’t have landed in this position today,” she said.