Court to deliver ruling on Friday if NSC Act is unconstitutional

 

Anwar Ibrahim’s lead counsel, Gopal Sri Ram, had submitted that the NSC Act is unconstitutional as it has taken away a number of basic fundamental rights.

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court will deliver its verdict on Friday whether the National Security Council (NSC) Act, which came into force on Aug 1, 2016, is unconstitutional.

Lawyer J Leela, a counsel in opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim’s legal team, said she was notified about the matter by the court registry last week.

“The bench will deliver its judgment via a virtual proceeding on Friday afternoon,” she told FMT.

Anwar is seeking a declaration that Section 12 of the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1983, Section 2 of the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1984, and Section 8 of the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1994 are null and void on grounds that they breach the basic structure of the Federal Constitution.

He is seeking a consequential declaration that the NSC Act is unconstitutional, null and void on grounds that it became law pursuant to an unconstitutional amendment and was not enacted in accordance with Article 149.

Parties had made oral submissions on Jan 7 before a seven-member bench, chaired by Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, which reserved judgment.

Others on the panel were Zaleha Yusof, Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Mary Lim Thiam Suan, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal and Rhodzariah Bujang.

Anwar’s lead counsel Gopal Sri Ram submitted the NSC Act was unconstitutional as it had taken away a number of basic fundamental rights like rights to life and personal liberty, freedom of movement, free speech, assembly and association, and right to property, as guaranteed in the Federal Constitution.

“This law did not come within the ambit of Article 149 to take away such rights to protect the security of the nation,” he had submitted.

The former Federal Court judge also said the Act was null and void as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong had not given his royal assent.

However, senior federal counsel Suzana Atan said the Act was drawn up in compliance with Article 149, though not expressly stated.

Suzana said the amendments to the constitution specified the time-frame for the King to give his assent or else the law was deemed to have been passed and constitutional.

She said the King was a constitutional monarch who must act on the advice of the Cabinet or minister, except those provided under Article 40 (2). - FMT