Farmers drop legal challenge against PH government

Lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla, who represented the six men from the National Farmers’ Association.

KUALA LUMPUR: A group of six men from a suspended farmers’ association today withdrew their legal challenge at the High Court here against the government’s decision to halt their operations due to problems with the association’s management.

Lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla, representing the six men, told justice Azizah Nawawi that they did not wish to pursue their case against the government, Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Minister Salahuddin Ayub, and the Registrar of Farmers’ Organisations.

“The six men have stated that they have resigned as the association’s directors,” he said.

Azizah also dismissed the judicial review by another three members after hearing arguments on the validity of the case from Haniff and Fahri Azzat, the lawyer representing the Registrar of Farmers’ Organisations.

She ordered the farmers to pay costs of RM10,000.

The three members had wanted to proceed with their case against the government.

However, Fahri argued that their case had become academic as the trio could not form the board of directors.

Meanwhile, Haniff told the court that the notice to suspend the farmers’ association, dated May 28, was defective as it did not clearly state the grounds on which their operations should be stopped.

The farmers from the National Farmers’ Association filed the legal challenge in July. It was believed to be the first case filed against the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government after May 9.

They claimed the decision to suspend their group was unfair and not in accordance with the Farmers Organisation Act.

The National Farmers Association was suspended on May 26 by the Registrar of Farmers’ Organisations after an audit conducted between March and April.

Its members filed an appeal against the suspension on June 7, but received no reply from Salahuddin.

The farmers sought a court declaration that the minister’s lack of response to their appeal was a breach of his statutory duty.

They also wanted the court to compel Salahuddin to respond. - FMT