The protesters were expected to be charged yesterday but it was learnt that police could not serve the summons to all of them.
of prosecution in the Attorney-General's Chambers Tun Abdul Majid Tun
Hamzah said they would charge the suspects only after all of them had
"The suspects were not held in remand by the police to produce them in court immediately."
On Monday, Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail said those who
carried the cow's head, and later addressed the illegal gathering while
stepping on the head, had been identified.
He decided to charge some of the suspects with uttering seditious words, an offence under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act .
Those found guilty could be jailed for up to three years and fined up to RM5,000 or both.
The suspects also face a substitute charge under Section 298 of the
Penal Code for uttering words with deliberate intent to wound the
religious feelings of another person.
Those convicted face a maximum one year jail sentence, a fine or both.
Gani said all the demonstrators would also be charged with taking part
in an illegal assembly, an offence under the Police Act.
28, some 50 residents of Section 23 in Shah Alam protested outside the
state secretariat building about the relocation of a 150-year-old Hindu
temple from Section 19 to their neighbourhood.
The incident sparked a nationwide outrage as the protesters were seen stepping and spitting on the cow's head.
The cow is deemed sacred by Hindus.********The Malay Mail
Sedition charge unfair, says lawyer
Submitted by pekwan on Wednesday, September 9th, 2009
Wednesday, September 9th, 2009 03:06:00
Kamarul: My clients didn't bring cow head
THE 12 people to be charged in court this morning for the
controversial 'cow-head' incident on Aug 26 are expected to plead that
their intentions to conduct the protest that day had been misconstrued
and had been unfairly turned into a religious issue.
Kamarul Irzuan, one of the lawyers representing the 12 to be
charged, also said that his clients had told him that they don't know
who even brought the cow head in the first place as it was never part
of their plans.
"None of my clients brought the cow head as it had nothing to do
with the main messages they wanted to send in their memorandum to the
Selangor State government."
Kamarul said the main grouse was that the Section 23 Shah Alam
residents felt aggrieved the State government had decided to locate a
Hindu temple within the mainly Muslim community without even consulting
"There isn't anything religious or racial about such a concern
because there are hardly any Hindus here in the first place and why
would anyone want to inconvenience them to come to a strange new place?
The residents wanted the State government to explain this rationale."
Kamarul further said that the Section 23 residents also wanted to
know why the Hindu temple was being relocated in the first place since
there didn't seem to be any real reason for it to be moved.
"The residents felt it was an arbitrary decision that was unfair to
both Hindus and Muslims, and wanted the State government to reconsider
as the decision seemed very high-handed."
He spoke to Malay Mail after the 12 were summoned to the Shah Alam
district police headquarters at 9pm yesterday. After being questioned,
all 12 were released on personal bonds at 12.30am and were instructed
to appear at the Shah Alam Sessions Court at 9am today.
Kamarul said the 12 had yet to be told what charges they would be
facing, but he expected all to be charged for illegal assembly under
Section 27 of the Police Act.
He also expected six of them to be charged under Section 1 and
Section 4 of the Sedition Act, and felt that it would be unfair for
this charge to be made.
Kamarul also drew a comparison to the recent case of a pig head that
was dumped at the Universiti Malaya surau in January. The carcass had
been placed in a Pas flag in a surau located in the Islamic studies
"What happened in that case?" he asked.
"Why was there no big legal controversy like what is happening now?
Furthermore, my clients had no religious extremism in mind when they
did what they did. Is it fair then that they are persecuted for
something they had never intended?"******
'What new location?' ask Section 23 residents
Submitted by pekwan on Tuesday, September 8th, 2009
Section 23 residents in the dark over site proposed for the Sri Maha Mariamman temple in Shah Alam
Tuesday, September 8th, 2009 07:42:00
SHAREL: Not aware of the new proposed site
representative for the residents of Section 23 Shah Alam does not know
anything about the new relocation site proposed for the Sri Maha
Mariamman Hindu temple, an issue that has generated much controversy
“The residents here and those from the action committee are not
aware about the new proposal,” said Section 23 representative, Sharel
Mohd Nor, when contacted last night.
The new location is in Section 23, just 100m away from the disputed site proposed earlier, and 400m from any house in the area.
“We thought it was just a rumour. We will have to wait for the official proposal and see if it is okay,” he said.
Sharel added if the Selangor State government was still firm with
its decision to relocate the temple to their area, the committee would
meet with Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim to find a
better solution for the issue.
On Aug 28, more than 100 people gathered in an illegal demonstration
to protest the relocation of the Sri Maha Mariamman temple in Section
19 to Section 23, Shah Alam.
During the assembly, a group of Muslim protesters trampled on a
severed cow’s head in protest at the building of the Hindu temple.