Khalid denied he had been critical of Bersih, while Mahathir confirmed he changed his views about Bersih rallies being violent after attending Bersih 4 and Bersih 5 which were peaceful.
The aim of Bersih 3.0 rally, organised by the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections (Bersih 2.0) on April 28, 2012, was to topple the government, former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar told the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday.
Khalid, 60, said this could be seen through how the organisers carried out the street gathering, which was not in accordance with the Peaceful Assembly Act.
The rally, initially aimed at ensuring clean elections, turned unruly and became out of control which resulted in damage to government property and fights.
He cited the damage to several police patrol vehicles by rally-goers to support his testimony.
The 2012 rally was led by Maria’s predecessor Ambiga Sreenevasan.
However, Khalid said Maria was one of the event’s organisers, adding that they were unable to control the crowd and had incited the public with politically charged speeches.
“The 2012 rally organisers had refused to obey the laws under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 and refused to abide by police orders,” he said.
He was testifying as a witness during the trial of former Bersih 2.0 chairman Maria Chin Abdullah’s defamation suit against Sungai Besar UMNO leader Datuk Jamal Md Yunos, for linking the Bersih 2.0 with the Islamic State terror group.
In his testimony, Khalid denied that the gathering was held properly and peacefully. He said that “there were threats to the public order but police managed to handle the situation.”
“The rally was marred with chaos, instances of assault and violence as well as destruction and vandalism of government properties.
“The assembly which was said to be peaceful was not conducted in a peaceful manner.
“It was clear that the purpose of the gathering was to bring down the government through other means,” he said during examination-in-chief by lawyer Mohamed Nasser Yusof, who represented Red Shirts leader Jamal.
Questioned by Maria’s counsel N Surendran on whether there was evidence that showed Bersih 3.0 was organised to topple the government, Khalid said the action of gathering and inciting the public pointed towards that (to bring down the government).
“That is not the way to express the wish for a free and fair election in the country. Not by making fiery speeches in the streets,” he said.
He denied that as a law enforcement officer, he had not facilitated Bersih in exercising its democratic right to assemble peacefully and that he had been critical of the organisation as evidenced in a series of media statements.
When asked by Nasser on whether Maria has ever been detained under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma), Khalid said police had received information that Bersih had obtained foreign funds.
Cross-examined by Surendran, Khalid said he was unsure whether the police had closed their probe on Maria as he had retired. However, he said he was aware that Maria had yet to be charged with any security-related offences by the public prosecutor.
Khalid said he was unaware that the court had dismissed a suit filed by the government against Bersih for the destruction of public property in 2012.
Meanwhile, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was subpoenaed to appear in Jamal’s defence, confirmed that he had made various statements previously that described the Bersih 3.0 rally in 2012 as “violent”.
But the former prime minister said yesterday that his 2012 remarks regarding the federal opposition’s readiness to create chaos through protests were “my opinion at that time”.
“I made those statements at that point of time based on my experience and the advice of the police in the past,” he clarified in court.
He said he changed his views about Bersih 2.0’s mass rallies being violent after attending the two latest rallies – Bersih 4 and Bersih 5 – that he said were peaceful.
When asked by Surendran, Mahathir confirmed that he had attended the Bersih 4 rally.
“I found that the situation then appeared calm,” he said.
“When I found that they didn’t spark chaos and they were prepared to the point of picking up rubbish,” he said, regarding his changed views following his observation of the Bersih 4 rally.
Later, when asked by Nasser, Mahathir agreed that he had changed his opinion about Bersih 2.0.
“Yes, it has changed after I joined the Bersih 5 rally where I found its leaders and participants did not show a tendency towards violence,” he said.
The Bersih 4 and Bersih 5 rallies were held on August 29-30, 2015, and November 19, 2016.
Earlier during the hearing, Mahathir confirmed that the Home Ministry had tabled a White Paper in Parliament in March 1988 when he was the Home Minister then.
An excerpt of the White Paper which was read out in court stated that the Communist Party of Malaya (PKM) secretary-general Chin Peng had held a secret meeting with two “radical Malay students”, namely Hishamuddin Rais and Mohd Yunus Lebai Ali in Beijing in January 1980.
Mahathir had testified that the Malaysian government had considered the PKM to be a terrorist organisation.
When asked regarding Mohd Yunus Lebai Ali, Mahathir said he only knew about Hishammudin.
Pressed on Mohd Yunus’s detention under ISA for several years, Mahathir replied that he had then acted on the advice of and information from the police.
It was not made clear during the hearing yesterday of the relevance of the White Paper excerpt to the case, but Mohd Yunus Lebai Ali refers to the late husband of Maria.
Maria, 60, filed a lawsuit against Jamal on Oct 7, 2016, for alleging that the electoral watchdog had been infiltrated by the Islamic State (IS) and accusing Bersih 2.0 of plotting to surround two international airports and key government buildings.
She claimed that Jamal had allegedly uttered the defamatory statements on two occasions: the first outside Putra World Trade Centre (PWTC) on Sept 28, 2016, while the second was at the federal police headquarters in Bukit Aman on Oct 4, 2016.
She claimed that the defamatory words, which were published in newspapers and online news portals, implied that she was abetting the terrorist group and was an agent of IS.
She is seeking general and aggravated damages, as well as an injunction to stop Jamal from uttering or publishing similar words, either verbally, in print, or online.
Jamal is relying on justification and fair comment as defence.
Later when met outside the courtroom, Nasser told reporters that a student activist in the 1970s – Hassan Karim – will be called to testify tomorrow afternoon and that the police will be testifying this Friday.
The trial was supposed to continue today before judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Abdul Wahab, with Jamal due to testify in his own defence. However, the judge was on leave to attend to personal matters and the hearing scheduled for today and tomorrow has been vacated.
According to Maria’s lawyer Latheefa Koya, a case management will be held on March 15 to determine the new trial dates.
Meanwhile Jamal’s lawyer V Mugunthan said his client yesterday filed an application to call two former top cops, Mohammed Hanif Omar and Abdul Rahim Nor, to give evidence.
“However, Maria is objecting to the application to include Hanif and Rahim as Jamal’s witnesses,” he said, adding that the application would likely be disposed of before the trial continued.
Latheefa said Maria was objecting as Jamal had given late notice, and that the testimonies of the former IGPs were not relevant to the case.