KUCHING: The Sarawak State Legislative Assembly (DUN) will apply to the Federal Court for leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on July 13, 2018 in the case of Civil Appeal No. Q-01(A)-250-70/2017 between Dewan Undangan Negeri of Sarawak and Member for Pujut, Ting Tiong Choon.
The ministerial motion for leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on July 13, 2018 was approved by the Deputy Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly, Dato Gerawat Gala yesterday after it was put to vote after a lengthy debate. 68 members of the august House voted in favour of the motion while seven members voted not in favour of the motion.
The motion was moved by Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture, Youths and Sports, Datuk Haji Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah and supported by Assistant Minister in the Chief Minister’s Office (Corporate Affairs) and Semop State Assemblyman, Abdullah Saidol.
Speaking against the motion were Irene Mary Chang Oi Ling (DAP-Bukit Assek), Wong King Wei (DAP- Padungan) and David Wong Kee Woan (DAP-Pelawan). However, Wong was disallowed to speak as he was representing Ting in the case. Abdul Karim said the motion was not intended to be personal vendetta or political persecution against the Pujut State Assemblyman. He said it was about the powers and the obligation of Members of the august House to protect the sanctity of the House.
He said one of the issues before the Court of Appeal was whether the Member of Pujut, having acquired Australian citizenship, had been disqualified from being elected as a Member of the august House. Another issue was whether his act of renouncing subsequently such citizenship had the effect of remedying the disqualification. Abdul Karim also informed that two of the judges had expressly held that the act of acquiring a foreign citizenship had the effect of disqualifying that person from being elected as a member of the House.
“More importantly, the two judges disagreed with the decision of the High Court Judge and held such disqualification is a continuing one, and not capable of being remedied,” he said. “The consequence of this pronouncement is that the Court of Appeal was of the view that the renunciation of his Australian citizenship has no effect whatsoever on his disqualification to be elected as a Member of this august House.” Abdul Karim also pointed out two of the judges expressly held that the act of acquiring a foreign citizenship had the effect of disqualifying that person to be elected as a Member of the House.
“More importantly, the two judges disagreed with the decision of the High Court Judge and held that such disqualification is a continuing one, and not capable of being remedied,” he said. Karim said the Court of Appeal was of the view that the renunciation of Ting’s Australian citizenship had no effect whatsoever on his disqualification to be elected as a Member of the House.
“The only thing is that the judges differed in their opinions as to whether this House is empowered to do anything about it. By a majority, the Court ruled that this House did not have the power to act as it did,” he said. Abdullah, in seconding the motion, said while the august House would respect the decision of the Court of Appeal, the judgements of the High Court and the Court of Appeal raised issues of great constitutional importance.
“These issues relate to the privilege of this House to determine its own membership, the disqualifications for election to this House and the doctrine of separation of powers in a system of parliamentary democracy as practised in Malaysia. “These important constitutional issues should be brought to the highest Court of the Federation so that there could be an authoritative judicial pronouncement thereon for the guidance of all three arms of Government.”
Abdul Karim said that the motion was moved not with a view to decide the fate of the Member for Pujut, but, for the predominant purpose of resolving important constitutional issues that had arisen as a result of legal proceedings initiated by the Member himself. He said should the august House agree with the motion to appeal against the said decision of the Court of Appeal, the State Attorney- General Sarawak and/or any Legal Officer from his Chambers would represent the august House in the proceedings before the Federal Court.
On July 13, 2018, the Court of Appeal in a majority decision, dismissed the appeal of the Sarawak Legislative Assembly against the High Court’s decision to reinstate the Member for Pujut as a Member of the august House. Meanwhile, at a press conference later, Abdul Karim said the appeal for application for leave had to be done within a month from the decision date.
The High Court will set the date. The date can be this year or next year,” he said, adding that time of hearing might be next year.
He said it was not necessary to apply for the certificate of urgency. “Because what we want to hear and to see is the finality and verdict of the highest court because there is a possibility once the apex court make the decision, the federal government and the state government might amend the laws,” he said. According to Abdul Karim, the case is being watched by the Malaysian government and all the law schools and law students “This will be a good decision because it will be a landmark case,” he added.
