Bersatu: Labuan MP suit attempts to circumvent anti-hopping law

Labuan MP Suhaili Abdul Rahman’s membership cessation lawsuit is an attempt to get around the anti-hopping law, Bersatu asserted.

The opposition party claimed this was seen with Dewan Rakyat speaker Johari Abdul deciding not to declare a casual vacancy on the parliamentary seat due to the civil action.

In its statement of defence made at the Shah Alam High Court yesterday, Bersatu said Suhaili (above) filed the suit eight days before Johari made his decision on July 9.

The anti-hopping law here is Article 49A of the Federal Constitution, which states a parliamentarian shall cease to be a member of the august house and his seat fall vacant if he ceases to be a member of the political party under whose ticket he or she won the seat.

ADS

“The plaintiff’s claim is an abuse of the court process to achieve an ulterior motive, wherein in order to circumvent Article 49A of the Federal Constitution and to avoid the risk of an establishment of a casual vacancy of his seat in the Dewan Rakyat, the plaintiff filed this action with this honourable court on July 1,” Bersatu said in the filing sighted by Malaysiakini.

Suhaili is one of six former Bersatu lawmakers whose status as MPs was in question but Johari allowed them to keep their parliamentary seats.

Bersatu pointed out that Suhaili has no legal standing to sue the party as his membership already ceased much earlier on May 17, when he was issued a notice about this.

The party said Suhaili was suspended late last year, and he failed to challenge this in a separate suit before the Kota Kinabalu High Court.

Fair hearing

The membership termination was on the heels of the Labuan MP declaring his support for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim in October last year.

Bersatu pointed out that Suhaili was never denied the right to a fair hearing against his then suspension, as he himself decided not to appeal to the party’s appeals board.

“By choosing not to pursue this course of action (appeal), the plaintiff is considered to have accepted Bersatu’s decision.

“The plaintiff cannot therefore blow hot and cold to suit him whenever he feels like it.

“Initially expressing that he will not challenge the clauses outlined in Bersatu’s constitution and accept the decisions of the disciplinary board, he is now pursuing legal action against the defendant without first exhausting his rights under Bersatu’s constitution in relation to his membership rights,” the party said.

Damage to Bersatu image

Bersatu added that the Shah Alam civil court has no power to hear actions dealing with internal party decision-making, per Section 18C of the Societies Act 1966.

The party pointed out that the Kota Kinabalu High Court made the same finding, and struck out Suhaili’s earlier suit.

“In any event, the defendant asserts that allowing the plaintiff, a member of Bersatu, to support positions contrary to the party’s instructions and principles could not only damage Bersatu’s public image and reputation but also undermine public trust in the party.

“This is particularly significant given that constituents frequently choose their representatives based on party affiliation,” Bersatu contended.

The party had cited similar reasons when it previously filed to strike out Suhaili’s present suit.

Under civil law, a defendant can file a statement of defence while still having the right to file a separate bid to nullify the suit.

Law firm Chetan Jethwani & Company is acting for Bersatu, who is being sued through its office bearer Muhammad Suhaimi Yahya.

Law firm Firoz Julian is representing Suhaili. - Mkini