KUALA LUMPUR (April 23): The Home Ministry and the government contend that the seizure of 172 rainbow-themed Swatch watches nationwide was legal as it was done under Section 17 of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (PPPA), that empowers the authorities to seize items without the need of a prohibitory order or warrant, as those items are considered undesirable publication due to them advocating for LGBTQ.

LGBTQ is an initialism for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer.

Federal counsel Mohammad Salehuddin Ali told High Court judge Datuk Amarjeet Singh Serjit Singh that since the items were considered undesirable publication under Section 7(1), the items need not be gazetted as prohibitory items first, before the seizure or forfeiture is made.

Salehuddin said the colours depicted the pride movement or one who supports it.

“This is Malaysia, and we do not support it [the LGBTQ concept],” he said.

Salehuddin clarified that the order to seize was not done under Section 16 of the PPPA, which requires that a prohibitory order be issued first before the seizure is made. But in this matter, the seizure could be made under Section 17, as those items were considered undesirable publication.

The federal counsel representing the home minister, the secretary general of the ministry, the secretary of the enforcement and control division of the ministry, and the government, also said there was nothing illegal in the seizure as it occurred at the Swatch premises which was open for [business] display.

Here, Salehuddin said the officers from the Home Ministry had examined the watches and they found that the watched were liable to be prohibited as they contained ideas that promoted LGBTQ based on the colours of the watches.

“The government says that Swatch’s rights to privacy on this matter does not apply, as undesirable publication does not fall under Article 5 [of the Federal Constitution] with regard to liberty. Here, we go to the shop and confiscate what is on display, as it is accessible to the public,” he added.

Salehuddin further cited the Court of Appeal decision in the Chong Ton Sin and author Ngeo Boon Lin case, in which the appellate court upheld the ban and seizure of Ngeo’s book “Gay is OK”, as it deemed the book undesirable publication.

The federal counsel was submitting the government’s arguments in Swatch Group (M) Sdn Bhd’s challenge over the seizure made at its premises nationwide. The company claims that 172 watches had been seized by the authorities in 16 different locations between May 13 and May 15, 2023. The total retail value of the watches amounted to RM64,795.

The watches were part of the company's "Pride Collection", in reference to the international human rights movement held in June which celebrates LGBT rights.

Swatch, a Swiss brand, is seeking to quash the decisions and actions of the Home Ministry officers on the searches of Swatch stores and seizures of the watches.

Besides this, in their judicial review application filed in June, they sought to quash the notice of seizure and were seeking a return of the watches. The international watchmaker is also seeking aggravated and exemplary damages.

The government officially imposed the ban on the LGBTQ-themed watches on Aug 10 last year, three months after they were confiscated.

Amarjeet granted leave (permission) to hear the merits of the judicial review on Aug 23 last year.

Following the hearing on Tuesday, Amarjeet fixed July 4 to deliver its decision on Swatch’s judicial review application.