KUALA LUMPUR: A lawyer said his legal questions on the Emergency are best referred for final determination by the apex court of the nation.
Syed Iskandar Jaafar al-Mahdzar said clauses 8 and 9 of Article 150 in the Federal Constitution touched on the basic structure of the supreme law of the Federation.
“A determination by the Federal Court will effectively bring the present proceedings to a speedy and economical end,” the lawyer said in his written submissions filed in the High Court and sighted by FMT.
The oral hearing is scheduled on Sept 14.
He said there would be no appeal nor a review should the Federal Court dispose of the legal questions.
On Jan 22, Syed Iskandar filed an application under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act for the matter to be heard by the Federal Court.
This is to determine whether under Article 150(8), an Emergency proclamation by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can be challenged on any grounds as this ouster clause prevents the judiciary from hearing a complaint.
Article 150(8) states that no court shall have the jurisdiction to entertain or determine any application, questioning or proceeding, in whatever form, on any ground, regarding the validity of the proclamation (of emergency) and its continued operation.
Syed Iskandar also wants the apex court to determine whether under Article 150(9), Parliament is said to be sitting only when the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara are assembled together and carrying out their business.
On Jan 11, Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah declared a state of emergency until Aug 1, or until an earlier date if the number of daily cases goes down, to curb the spread of Covid-19.
Syed Iskandar said the matter would prolong should the High Court decide to hear the legal question as parties would file appeals to the Court of Appeal, the second highest court in the judicial ladder.
He said the two legal questions should be referred to the highest court because early this year, two separate Federal Court benches were divided in their opinion on ouster clauses in two Federal laws.
The minority judgments had held that ouster clauses were against the basic structure of the courts acting as check and balance on the executive and the legislature.
As such, Syed Iskandar said this rendered his application as a fit and proper case for the question to be referred to the Federal Court. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.