Appeal for reinstatement of suit over Anwar’s royal pardon dismissed
The Federal Court today dismissed a lawyer’s application for leave to proceed with an appeal to reinstate a legal action against the royal pardon awarded to Anwar Ibrahim over the prime minister’s conviction in a sodomy case.
A three-person Federal Court bench chaired by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat unanimously rejected Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz’s leave to appeal bid.
The other apex court bench members were P Nallini and Vernon Ong Lam Kiat.
Khairul was appealing against a Court of Appeal decision to allow Tambun MP Anwar’s appeal to strike out the writ of summons on Sept 21, 2021.
Pakatan Harapan chairperson Anwar then was appealing against the Kuala Lumpur High Court's decision to dismiss his nullification bid on Sept 21, 2020.
In a brief oral ruling delivered after the bench heard oral submissions from opposing parties’ legal representatives this morning, Tengku Maimun said the court below (Court of Appeal) had made a finding of fact that the Pardons Board had been properly constituted in May 2018.
Malaysia’s top judge ruled that the issue of Agong’s power of pardon is non-justiciable (cannot be challenged in court) has been settled and does not warrant departure from established precedent.
“We find the matter has become academic. (The application for leave to appeal) is dismissed with no order to costs,” Tengku Maimun said during online proceedings.
The effect of today’s apex court verdict to deny leave means that it would not set any further date to hear the merits of the appeal.
Lawyer Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz
Counsel Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla acted for appellant Khairul, while respondents - Pardons Board and Anwar - were represented by lawyer J Leela as well as senior federal counsel Suzana Atan.
Composition of Pardons Board
On Feb 26, 2020, before the High Court, Khairul filed the civil action which named the Pardons Board and Anwar as the two defendants.
In a media statement then, the lawyer said the legal action targets the Pardons Board’s advice to the Agong which was dated May 16, 2018.
On that date, Anwar was released from jail following the royal pardon concerning his sodomy case involving his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
Khairul contended that the Pardons Board’s composition then was set up wrongly and not in accordance with the requirements under the Federal Constitution.
According to a copy of the legal action’s statement of claim, Khairul claimed that following the 14th general election on May 9, 2018, and the formation of the Harapan government, several wrong and unconstitutional steps were taken to secure Anwar’s royal pardon.
Khairul, among others, claimed that the Pardons Board was set up within two days after the post-GE14 Harapan government was established on May 11. Thus, it would be impossible for the Pardons Board to convene to advise the Agong.
He claimed that in the run-up to Anwar’s pardon on May 16, 2018, Dr Mahathir Mohamad had a press conference on May 11 where the premier announced that the Agong had agreed to issue a pardon to Anwar.
Khairul alleged that this was improper because the cabinet was not fully formed on May 11 and that Article 42 of the Federal Constitution states that the Agong’s power to pardon has to be exercised through the advice of the Pardons Board.
The lawyer also claimed that he is affected party by the pardon granted to Anwar because he is a Malaysian citizen who questions Anwar’s eligibility to be the eighth prime minister.
He was seeking a declaration that the first defendant, namely the Pardons Board, was not properly established on May 16, 2018, and, therefore, the advice it gave to the Agong on that day was invalid.
Khairul sought a declaration that the royal pardon to Anwar is invalid and void because of the invalidity of the establishment of the Pardons Board.
In the alternative, the lawyer also sought a declaration that Agong’s pardon in relation to Anwar is limited to a pardon of the sentence imposed on him, and should not be extended to a pardon of Anwar’s conviction by the Federal Court.
Counsel Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla acted for appellant Khairul, while respondents - Pardons Board and Anwar - were represented by lawyer J Leela as well as senior federal counsel Suzana Atan.
Composition of Pardons Board
On Feb 26, 2020, before the High Court, Khairul filed the civil action which named the Pardons Board and Anwar as the two defendants.
In a media statement then, the lawyer said the legal action targets the Pardons Board’s advice to the Agong which was dated May 16, 2018.
On that date, Anwar was released from jail following the royal pardon concerning his sodomy case involving his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
Khairul contended that the Pardons Board’s composition then was set up wrongly and not in accordance with the requirements under the Federal Constitution.
According to a copy of the legal action’s statement of claim, Khairul claimed that following the 14th general election on May 9, 2018, and the formation of the Harapan government, several wrong and unconstitutional steps were taken to secure Anwar’s royal pardon.
Khairul, among others, claimed that the Pardons Board was set up within two days after the post-GE14 Harapan government was established on May 11. Thus, it would be impossible for the Pardons Board to convene to advise the Agong.
He claimed that in the run-up to Anwar’s pardon on May 16, 2018, Dr Mahathir Mohamad had a press conference on May 11 where the premier announced that the Agong had agreed to issue a pardon to Anwar.
Khairul alleged that this was improper because the cabinet was not fully formed on May 11 and that Article 42 of the Federal Constitution states that the Agong’s power to pardon has to be exercised through the advice of the Pardons Board.
The lawyer also claimed that he is affected party by the pardon granted to Anwar because he is a Malaysian citizen who questions Anwar’s eligibility to be the eighth prime minister.
He was seeking a declaration that the first defendant, namely the Pardons Board, was not properly established on May 16, 2018, and, therefore, the advice it gave to the Agong on that day was invalid.
Khairul sought a declaration that the royal pardon to Anwar is invalid and void because of the invalidity of the establishment of the Pardons Board.
In the alternative, the lawyer also sought a declaration that Agong’s pardon in relation to Anwar is limited to a pardon of the sentence imposed on him, and should not be extended to a pardon of Anwar’s conviction by the Federal Court.
This frivolous suit was originally part of the "Stop Anwar" campaign.
ReplyDeleteIt never had any real chance, with the Pardon given by the YDP Agong.
The Race and Religion warriors didn't jump up and down condemning "Derhaka" against Royalty, for obvious reasonsm