Ikatan Guru-Guru Muslim Malaysia (IGMM) will file an application to the High Court in Kota Bharu to reinstate its lawsuit over the legality of vernacular schools.
The group’s lead counsel Shaharudin Ali said this to Malaysiakini this afternoon.
"We will invoke Order 34, Rule 6 (2) of the Rules of Court 2012 latest by tomorrow. In this case, we are the plaintiff, not the defendant,” the lawyer said.
Order 34 Rule 6 (1) of the Rules of Court states that if, at the time appointed for the pre-trial case management, any party fails to attend, the court may dismiss the legal action.
However, Order 34 Rule 6 (2) states that an order made by the court, in the absence of a party concerned or affected by the order, may be set aside by the court, on the application of that party.
Yesterday, news portal Free Malaysia Today reported that the Kota Bharu High Court struck out the action initiated by the IGMM due to the non-attendance of the plaintiff's counsel during case management of the matter on Sunday (Oct 25).
Shaharudin today claimed that he was not present during the case management on Sunday as he had a serious eye condition.
"Blood was oozing from my right eye. Specialists call it subconjunctival hemorrhage. When my right eye was literally covered in blood, due to a burst vein, it is not a trivial matter."
"It is not easy to move around. I was under medication, trapped in my own home under the PKPB (Conditional Movement Control Order), but resting," he said.
He added that his law office in Kota Damansara is located in a Covid-19 red zone.
The lawyer said that the case management was held on a Sunday, and even if it was held on other days, their office remained closed due to the conditional MCO.
"We will present five grounds why the reinstatement (of the suit) is the right thing to do. Due to a combination of the above factors, we faced difficulty finding a suitable lawyer in Kota Bharu to mention on our behalf.
"But 'mentioning on behalf' is not a major issue here in our view, considering the fact that the case is about constitutional questions involving the future of Chinese and Tamil based education in this country," Shaharudin said.
On Feb 21, it was reported that IGMM filed the lawsuit against the government in the Kota Bharu High Court to challenge the constitutionality of vernacular schools.
The group was seeking a declaration that Sections 17 and 28 of the Education Act 1996, which permits the use of Mandarin and Tamil as a medium of instruction in Chinese and Tamil schools, are inconsistent with the Federal Constitution.
Section 17 of the Education Act stipulates that the national language shall be the main medium of instruction in all educational institutions in the National Education System, except for national-type schools under Section 28 or others given an exemption by the education minister.
Section 28 of the same Act allows the education minister to establish both national schools and national-type schools.
Previously, Parti Bumiputera Perkasa Malaysia (Putra) vice-president Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz mounted a suit against the government to challenge the use of Mandarin and Tamil as a medium of instruction in vernacular schools.
In December 2019, the Association of Peninsular Malaysia Students (GPMS) and the Islamic Educational Development Council (MAPPIM) challenged the existence of Chinese and Tamil national-type schools.
Both groups claimed that vernacular schools may be in conflict with the national language under Article 152(1) of the Federal Constitution.
Article 152(1)(a) states that the national language shall be the Malay language and that no person shall be prohibited or prevented from using (except for official purposes) or from teaching or learning any other language. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.