A three-man bench chaired by Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum dismissed the government’s leave to appeal application.

No grounds was given by the court for its refusal to grant leave.

However, under Section 98 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1965, an applicant must convince the bench that its legal question/s was/were raised for the first time and is of public importance.

The question posed was whether Section 6 (2) (g) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) 2012 imposed a legal liability on the government to seek compensation for damage of its property.

Lawyer Tommy Thomas, who appeared for former Bersih 2.0 chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan and 14 steering committee members, said the government’s leave question was frivolous.

“Under the PAA the government is excluded from suing organisers of peaceful assemblies,” he said.

Federal Counsel Alice Loke said under the PAA, the government could be a plaintiff to obtain damages for loss suffered.

Commenting on the court’s decision, incumbent Bersih 2.0 chairman Maria Chin Abdullah said she was glad the court had clarified the legal position of organisers.

“We cannot be held responsible if rally participants destroy or damage public property,” she said.

Maria hoped the rulings of the High Court and Court of Appeal would apply to all strata of government – starting from the local authorities.

In August last year, the Court of Appeal dismissed the government’s suit to claim RM110,000 in compensation from Bersih 2.0.

“There is no provision under the PAA for the government to sue for damages in a rally,” said Justice Rohana Yusuf who had led a three-man bench.

The High Court in 2015 dismissed the suit for seeking compensation for damages to public property during the Bersih 3 rally on April 28, 2012.

In its suit, the government had sought RM110,543 in special damages to repair police cars and other costs.