SUHAKAM Report of Public Inquiry into the Incidents During and After the Public Assembly of 28 April 2012 Chapter 5 FINDINGS BY THE PANEL OF INQUIRY 5.1 The Panel of Inquiry’s findings are based on the testimonies of the witnesses, assisted by the questions and submissions from the observers and the exhibits tendered. The Organiser 5.2 According to section 6(2)(f) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 (PAA 2012), one of the responsibilities of any organiser of a peaceful assembly is to co-operate with the public authorities to ensure the orderly and lawful conduct of the assembly. Section 9(1) of the PAA 2012 also requires the organiser to submit notification to the Officer in Charge of the Police District (OCPD) ten days before the event. According to the testimony of Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan (W48), BERSIH 2.0 had written to the OCPD of Dang Wangi via a letter dated 16 April 2012 (Exhibit 66 (a)), informing him of its intention to organise a peaceful assembly at Dataran Merdeka on 28 April 2012 and seeking his co-operation in ensuring a safe and peaceful assembly on that day. The organiser had also written a similar letter to DBKL (page 206 of Exhibit 66(a), on 16 April 2012 notifying DBKL of its intention to hold the assembly at Dataran Merdeka. 5.3 The Panel notes that on 16 April, the date of the letter, the PAA 2012 had yet to be enforced. Accordingly, the question of whether notice or sufficient notice had been given as required by section 9(1) of the PAA 2012 does not arise. Suffice to say, however, that notice was given to the OCPD of the impending event but whether it was pursuant to now-repealed section 27 of the Police Act 1967 or section 9(1) of the PAA 2012 is not relevant for the purpose of this Inquiry. 5.4 The Panel takes note that in a letter dated 19 April 20012, DBKL rejected the request of the organiser to hold the assembly at Dataran Merdeka (page 208 of Exhibit 66(a)). No alternative venue was suggested in the said letter. 47