The Kuala Lumpur High Court fixed Feb 16 next year to hear applications by three lawyers and two groups to intervene in a legal action over the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s decision not to accede to Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s request for an emergency declaration.
Lawyer R Kengadharan confirmed today that the court fixed the hearing date following an e-review case management on the matter this morning.
“The court fixed Feb 16 to hear the interveners' applications. The same day is also fixed for case management of the originating summons (main legal action),” the lawyer said when contacted.
Kengadharan is acting for lawyer Syed Iskandar Syed Jaafar, who on Oct 30 had filed the legal action to seek the court’s guidance over the constitutional issue linked to the Agong’s decision not to abide by Muhyiddin’s request for a declaration of an emergency.
Following the filing of the legal action, multiple parties have filed applications to intervene in the matter.
On Nov 4, the Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia (PPMM) filed its application to intervene in the legal action.
The next day (Nov 5), lawyers Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz and Malcolm Fernandez filed their intervener application.
According to court documents, the other proposed interveners are lawyer Nazira Abdul Rahim and NGO the Centre for a Better Tomorrow.
On Oct 25, it was reported that the Agong decided not to accede to Muhyiddin’s request for a proclamation of emergency on the declared reason that the current Perikatan Nasional (PN) government was handling the Covid-19 pandemic effectively.
Plaintiff Syed Iskandar is seeking for the court to determine, among others, whether the Agong “has an unfettered discretion not to declare an emergency despite the advice of the prime minister of the federal cabinet to the contrary”.
The plaintiff also wants the court to determine this through the true construction of Articles 40 and 150 of the Federal Constitution.
Article 40 generally deals with the need of the Agong to act in accordance with the advice of the cabinet or of a minister acting under the general authority of the cabinet, among others.
"This is a public interest litigation brought to vindicate the rule of law and to uphold the Federal Constitution," the plaintiff stated in the suit.
Article 150 deals with the power of the Agong to issue a proclamation of emergency when there is a situation where the security, economic life or public order in the federation, or any part thereof, is threatened, among others.
The plaintiff is also seeking for the court to determine the validity of an amendment to Article 150, which inserted clauses among others, that bars the court from hearing legal action in relation to the issue of a proclamation of emergency.
Among these amendments is the insertion of Article 150 (8), which states that no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine any application, question or proceeding, in whatever form, on any ground, regarding the validity of the proclamation of emergency. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.