![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaSSbFvzNGJj5X9f0qFjpd16vEt6mror0DX1jow79v88x2cqPuNZSAY3jL41Su7I0tt59tyxlNKwSrOsg412yqkZZjtHnH_RDAIHuIj4WOQ_VAt_8GX9m2D6SvJ0gHtXxkAOehwaxlpCo/s280/zaid.jpg)
This follows the High Court 's decision to allow a striking-out application by the victorious candidate, P Kamalanathan.
Election judge justice Azahar Mohamed has ruled that the election petition was defective as it had not stated clearly the alleged bribery acts.
Zaid had filed the petition on May 24 to invalidate the April 25 poll results on grounds that there wereattempts to induce voters by BN chief Najib Abdul Razak.
He alleged that Kamalanathan knew of the inducements made by Najib. The focal point of the case was Najib's promise of RM3 million to SRJK (C) Rasa School and the presentation of cheques to the Felda settlers.
Kamalanathan applied to strike out the petition on the grounds that it was trivial and an abuse of the court process.
He claimed that Zaid had failed to identify the people said to have been offered bribes by - or to have received from - Najib during the election campaign, as alleged in the petition.
According to him, the pleading in the petition does not come under Section 32(c) of the Election Offences Act 1954 (EOA) as it does not fall within the meaning of corrupt practices as stipulated under Section 10(a) of the Act.
Justice Azahar had earlier dismissed Zaid's preliminary objection to Kamalanathan's strike-out application.
Ninety percent of election petition cases end with a striking-out application.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.