PUTRAJAYA: Former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee Yazid Sufaat and another man who had been acquitted of promoting terrorism in Syria may have to return to court again to answer the charges after all.

This comes as the Court of Appeal ordered the High Court yesterday to proceed with the trial of Yazid and Muhammad Hilmi Hasim, who was charged with abetting Yazid.

Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin, who led a three-member bench, overturned the acquittal by the High Court on May 20.

The prosecution had appealed the High Court decision to quash the charges and set free Yazid, Hilmi and a third accused person, Halimah Hussein.

Halimah, however, was not part of proceedings yesterday although an arrest warrant had been issued against her.

Earlier this year, Yazid and the two others were among the first to be arrested under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma), the security law which had replaced the much-criticised ISA.

Justice Abu Samah said the High Court judge had been wrong to find that charges against the trio were unsustainable because the charges referred to the alleged promoting of terrorist activities outside of Malaysia.

“We direct the case to be heard and to be fixed for mention,” Abu Samah told lawyers after reading a brief ruling.

However, Yazid’s and Hilmi’s counsel Amer Hamzah Arshad said they would be filing an application for leave to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision.

The duo must obtain leave, or permission, from the Federal Court before the country’s apex court can hear the appeal.

The Court of Appeal granted a stay of proceedings yesterday pending the final appeal but Yazid and Hilmi will continue to remain in custody as they are facing separate charges of being part of a terrorist group.

Both men were arrested again a week after their acquittal and slapped with different charges.

They two men were in court yesterday handcuffed to each other throughout the appeal proceedings. They were later allowed to meet with lawyers and family members for 15 minutes.

Earlier, during submissions, senior federal counsel Datuk Hanafiah Zakaria argued that Sosma was indeed applicable to security threats targeted at Malaysia or those planned in Malaysia to be carried out in another country.

“It is shortsighted to say that the commission of terrorist acts overseas does not jeopardise our internal security. In this case it is Syria. What if they retaliate against us?

“What if the targets were countries like Singapore, Indonesia, the US, UK or Israel? Will the same argument apply?” Hanafiah asked.

Amer Hamzah, meanwhile, sought to argue that Sosma is a special piece of legislation that can only be used to deal with threats against Malaysia and the Malaysian public.

“We had the Internal Security Act (predecessor to Sosma) to deal with national threats and national security, not international threats and international security,” he said.

An example would be the Lahad Datu incursion earlier this year by Sulu militants, said Amer Hamzah.

The Court of Appeal ruling yesterday effectively set a broad interpretation for Sosma and has ramifications on future cases involving trans-national terrorism.

This is because Sosma will apply when dealing with those accused of using Malaysia as a base to plan terrorist acts outside of Malaysia.

For more stories, go to www.fz.com, the website for freedom of expression and fairness in articulation.

This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, on JUNE 19, 2013.