KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 16 — Former Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail had launched a malicious prosecution against PKR lawmaker Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad by using a law which was invalid, the latter said today.

Nik Nazmi, 35, claimed that the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ second charge against him under the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) 2012 was due to his status as an opposition politician.

“I was prosecuted for the second time through the Second Charge because I am a Keadilan politician even though there were other rallies that do not comply with PAA 2012, but those rallies’ organisers were not prosecuted at all because they are related to or are supporters or members of Umno or Barisan Nasional,” the PKR Youth chief said in his witness statement submitted in court today.

Nik Nazmi, who is also a Selangor state executive councillor, said the second charge was also despite the Petaling Jaya City Council having granted approval for the use of the MBPJ stadium in Kelana Jaya for a May 8, 2013 rally that was carried out peacefully.

“The prosecution for the second case and the appeal to the High Court in the first case was done by the first defendant although the Court of Appeal’s decision to acquit and discharge me was still in force and not set aside by the Federal Court,” he said.

Today was the first day of hearing for Nik Nazmi’s lawsuit filed in March 31, 2015 against Abdul Gani and the Malaysian government for “malicious prosecution” and “misfeasance in public office”.

Nik Nazmi was first charged in the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court on May 17, 2013 with allegedly violating Section 9 (1) of the PAA 2012 by failing to notify police 10 days prior to the Blackout 505 rally the same year. This offence was punishable under Section 9(5) with a maximum RM10,000 fine.

The Shah Alam High Court had in November 2013 rejected Nik Nazmi’s striking out bid and constitutional challenge of Section 9(5), but the Court of Appeal had on April 24, 2014 reversed that decision and in a landmark ruling struck out Section 9(5) as an unconstitutional law.

But after the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court had on May 5, 2014 affirmed the Court of Appeal’s decision to discharge Nik Nazmi, the prosecution had the next day charged him at the same court for the second time with the same offence. That particular offence was still invalid following the appellate court’s 2014 decision.

Nik Nazmi said the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court had however on the same day on May 6, 2014 discharged him as it was bound by the Court of Appeal’s decision, noting that the prosecution had not appealed then.

Although the Court of Appeal had on October 1, 2015 ruled in PKR’s R. Yuneswaran’s case that Section 9(5) was constitutional, this provision was invalid when Nik Nazmi was charged the second time.

Deputy public prosecutor Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, who was tasked with Nik Nazmi’s prosecution, was asked who had decided to prosecute the politician as the rally organiser.

“The Public Prosecutor at that time was Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail,” he said in his witness statement that was also submitted in court today.

Lawyer Syahredzan Johan was Nik Nazmi’s lead counsel today, while senior federal counsel Kamal Azira Hassan represented Abdul Gani and the Malaysian government.

The hearing before High Court judge Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim resumes tomorrow morning.

That third case

When met outside court, Nik Nazmi also explained a case where the prosecution had charged him on October 6, 2015 with the same PAA 2012 offence for the third time.

“For the third case which I pleaded guilty to, actually after so long, already entering the fourth year, it’s still not over yet.

“Because there are other cases with almost similar facts where the accused were able to arrive at an agreement with the government. So I made the same move, we contacted the DPP, they agreed and there was a fine of RM1,500,” he said, referring to December 8, 2016 where he pleaded guilty at the Shah Alam High Court and was fined RM1,500.

“But after that, they appealed for heavier penalty, maybe to cause me to not be able to contest in the upcoming general elections and be disqualified from my existing seat,” the Seri Setia assemblyman told reporters.

The government’s appeal hearing against the RM1,500 fine meted out on Nik Nazmi has yet to be heard at the Court of Appeal.

Under the Federal Constitution’s Article 48, lawmakers are disqualified from holding office if they are sentenced to at least a year in prison or fined at least RM2,000.