It is wrong for Dewan Rakyat speaker Azhar Azizan Harun to cite sub judice as the reason for rejecting a motion to debate the seizure of Petronas assets by purported heirs of the Sulu sultanate, lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla said.
Taking to social media, Haniff (above) said the rule is not applicable in Malaysia as the arbitration proceedings were conducted in other jurisdictions, namely the supreme court in Madrid, Spain, and subsequently by a French arbitration court.
“Most importantly, even if we want to apply the sub judice rules, it cannot be applied to our clients (parties) who are having discussions among themselves (in the Dewan Rakyat).
“The case involves the government of Malaysia, which represents over 32 million rakyat and they have a right to discuss among themselves via the elected representatives in the Dewan Rakyat,” Haniff said.
He added that Kota Belud MP Isnaraissah Munirah Majilis’ motion merely demanded an explanation from the government, rather than questioning the court ruling.
“The reason given by the speaker is superficial and it does not apply directly according to the definition and the application of sub judice concept.
“What the lawmaker demanded was an explanation needed by the people on the seizure of Petronas asset, (including) the next steps that will be taken and our appeal status in France and Spain,” Haniff said.
1MDB reminder
He then cited similar incidents where the then Dewan Rakyat speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia blocked several attempts from lawmakers to have the Lower House of Parliament debate the 1MDB scandal.
“Now the speaker wants to make the same mistake again. I am worried that this development will be seen by the world as a laughing stock as the people’s right to ask about issues related to sovereignty are denied,” he said.
Therefore, Haniff said, the speaker should change his mind and allow the lawmakers to debate the seizure of Petronas assets as soon as possible.
“This can be done by an appeal brought (by Isnaraissah) according to Clause 43 of the parliamentary Standing Order,” he said.
Concurring, Amanah's Sepang MP Mohamed Hanipa Maidin said he felt that the principle of sub judice has not been invoked properly by the speaker.
The lawmaker said it was never intended to be used as a blanket ban on the fundamental right of freedom of speech, which is duly enshrined in the Federal Constitution.
Chaos broke out in the Dewan Rakyat yesterday after Azhar threw out Isnaraissah's motion to debate the seizure of Petronas assets, resulting in her being ejected from the House.
Last week, London-based Financial Times reported that the purported heirs of the Sulu sultanate, who are claiming US$14.92 billion (RM62.59 billion) from Malaysia, seized two Luxembourg-incorporated subsidiaries of Petronas.
Lawyers of the claimants seized the subsidiaries Petronas Azerbaijan (Shah Deniz) and Petronas South Caucasus, which together are reportedly worth US$2 billion.
According to a news report dated July 12, the lawyers said bailiffs in Luxembourg seized the holding companies on behalf of their clients.
The purported descendants of the last Sulu sultan, Sultan Jamalul Kiram II, are claiming the astronomical sum from Malaysia following an arbitration process.
The arbitration process was initiated in response to Malaysia cutting off annual lease payments of RM5,300 to the Sulu sultanate in 2013 in the wake of a bloody incursion in Lahad Datu in eastern Sabah by a militant group from the Philippines claiming to represent the Sulu sultanate. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.