Court of Appeal to rule Aug 16 if suit against Hadi will be restored
Two Sabahans had filed an originating summons in December 2020, seeking declarations that PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang had committed sedition and was unfit to hold public office.
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal will deliver its decision on Aug 16 whether to allow an appeal by two Sabahans to revive a suit filed against PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang for an alleged attack on Christians.
Lawyer R Kengadharan, a member of the legal team representing Maklin Masiau and Lawrence Jomiji Kinsil @ Maximilhian, said the new date was fixed by a deputy registrar during case management today.
“Initially the court was scheduled to deliver its ruling today but that has been adjourned,” he told FMT.
Lawyer Muhd Daniel Baharudin represented Hadi.
A three-member Court of Appeal bench consisting of Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, Supang Lian and Ghazali Cha heard the appeal on Feb 8.
On May 11 last year, High Court judge Akhtar Tahir allowed Hadi’s application to strike out the suit, holding that the two plaintiffs lacked locus standi to bring the action.
The judge also ordered Maklin and Lawrence to pay costs of RM50,000 each to Hadi.
The duo filed an originating summons in December 2020, seeking declarations that Hadi had committed sedition and was unfit to hold public office.
They claim Hadi had made a seditious statement against Christians and Christian missionaries in PAS publication Harakah on Jan 18, 2016, but had not been prosecuted.
In their affidavit to support the action, the Sabahans said Hadi’s statement was also published by FMT on the same day.
The Sabahans had raised a preliminary objection to the striking out application, claiming that Hadi had allegedly committed contempt by insulting the judiciary on his Facebook page a month earlier.
Submitting to the Court of Appeal in February, lawyer Gopal Sri Ram argued that Hadi’s alleged attacks were a matter of public interest which the High Court judge failed to appreciate.
He also said Hadi could not come to court after having made a scurrilous attack on the judiciary.
Sri Ram said lawyers for the Sabahans and Hadi were also not accorded the opportunity to submit on costs, which demonstrated a breach of natural justice.
Meanwhile, lawyer Yusfarizal Yussoff, who appeared for Hadi, submitted that the Sabahans did not have legal standing to bring the action.
He said Hadi had only targeted Christian missionaries and not Christians in general.
Yusfarizal added that the appellants had also failed to show they had suffered special damage from Hadi’s statements.
Yusfarizal said the duo had failed to produce the copy of Harakah which published Hadi’s remarks but only exhibited an unverified reproduction by FMT.
The lawyer said the High Court judge imposed punitive costs because the two had “resurrected a matter long dead and buried” to get cheap publicity and choke the judicial system with unnecessary and frivolous litigation.
He also said the two could not seek declarations for an alleged criminal offence in a civil court.
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal will deliver its decision on Aug 16 whether to allow an appeal by two Sabahans to revive a suit filed against PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang for an alleged attack on Christians.
Lawyer R Kengadharan, a member of the legal team representing Maklin Masiau and Lawrence Jomiji Kinsil @ Maximilhian, said the new date was fixed by a deputy registrar during case management today.
“Initially the court was scheduled to deliver its ruling today but that has been adjourned,” he told FMT.
Lawyer Muhd Daniel Baharudin represented Hadi.
A three-member Court of Appeal bench consisting of Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, Supang Lian and Ghazali Cha heard the appeal on Feb 8.
On May 11 last year, High Court judge Akhtar Tahir allowed Hadi’s application to strike out the suit, holding that the two plaintiffs lacked locus standi to bring the action.
The judge also ordered Maklin and Lawrence to pay costs of RM50,000 each to Hadi.
The duo filed an originating summons in December 2020, seeking declarations that Hadi had committed sedition and was unfit to hold public office.
They claim Hadi had made a seditious statement against Christians and Christian missionaries in PAS publication Harakah on Jan 18, 2016, but had not been prosecuted.
In their affidavit to support the action, the Sabahans said Hadi’s statement was also published by FMT on the same day.
The Sabahans had raised a preliminary objection to the striking out application, claiming that Hadi had allegedly committed contempt by insulting the judiciary on his Facebook page a month earlier.
Submitting to the Court of Appeal in February, lawyer Gopal Sri Ram argued that Hadi’s alleged attacks were a matter of public interest which the High Court judge failed to appreciate.
He also said Hadi could not come to court after having made a scurrilous attack on the judiciary.
Sri Ram said lawyers for the Sabahans and Hadi were also not accorded the opportunity to submit on costs, which demonstrated a breach of natural justice.
Meanwhile, lawyer Yusfarizal Yussoff, who appeared for Hadi, submitted that the Sabahans did not have legal standing to bring the action.
He said Hadi had only targeted Christian missionaries and not Christians in general.
Yusfarizal added that the appellants had also failed to show they had suffered special damage from Hadi’s statements.
Yusfarizal said the duo had failed to produce the copy of Harakah which published Hadi’s remarks but only exhibited an unverified reproduction by FMT.
The lawyer said the High Court judge imposed punitive costs because the two had “resurrected a matter long dead and buried” to get cheap publicity and choke the judicial system with unnecessary and frivolous litigation.
He also said the two could not seek declarations for an alleged criminal offence in a civil court.
No comments:
Post a Comment