KUALA LUMPUR (Feb 11): The High Court here will decide on March 11 whether or not to hear the full merits of a challenge filed by three opposition representatives over the emergency proclamation that has suspended the Parliament and state legislative assembly sittings.
This comes after their application for leave was heard today by High Court Justice Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid.
The three opposition representatives — Datuk Seri Salahuddin Ayub (the Pulai Member of Parliament [MP]), Datuk Johari Abdul (Sungai Petani MP) and Dr Abdul Aziz Bari (Tebing Tinggi assemblyman) filed the challenge last month to institute a judicial review of the validity of Sections 11, 14 and 15 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance 2021 which they want the court to declare as unconstitutional.
They said that the sections are unconstitutional as they deny the role of Parliament and legislative assemblies as provided by Article 150 (3) and (5) of the Federal Constitution.
Article 150(3) states that any proclamation of emergency or ordinance must be laid before Parliament. Article 150(5) says that during the emergency, Parliament may make laws as required by the emergency.
The ordinance, they added, suspends Parliament and state assemblies from sitting and that both houses would be convened on a date which the Yang di-Pertuan Agong thinks is appropriate.
“This effectively means that the date will be determined by the prime minister,” they said, adding that this is improper.
The three opposition representatives — represented by Datuk Dr Gurdial Singh Nijar and Christopher Leong — said that leave should be granted as the application deals with crucial constitutional issues of national significance.
“The constitutional separation of powers is required where any action by the executive is to be scrutinised by Parliament. The judiciary is empowered to decide whether or not the ordinance has negated the role of Parliament.
“Never before in the history of this country had Parliament’s power been curtailed by the government during an emergency,” they told theedgemarkets.com.
They added that the court should grant leave for the application to be heard on its full merits if the matters brought up are arguable.
Meanwhile, senior federal counsel Suzana Atan, who appeared for the government and the prime minister, said the High Court had no jurisdiction to deal with the application as its jurisdiction is ousted by Article 150(8) and 150 (6).
“These provide that the court has no jurisdiction to rule any ordinance as invalid,” she added.
Following this, Justice Ahmad Kamal is reserving judgement until March 11. Earlier, the High Court overruled the Attorney-General Chambers' (AGC) request to postpone the leave application pending a hearing of a similar application filed in the Johor Baru High Court.
Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Abdul Karim had filed a similar application, which was supposed to be heard first, but Suzana asked the court for the matter be transferred to Kuala Lumpur as the cases are similar.
Gurdial objected to the adjournment of the application by Salahuddin, Johari and Abdul Aziz as it is a matter of public interest. Moreover, they had filed a certificate of urgency and should proceed with the case, he added.
For these reasons, Justice Ahmad Kamal allowed the matter to proceed for a hearing.