No date set for Anifah's verdict
Published on: Friday, September 21, 2018
Kota Kinabalu: The Election Court will deliver its decision to a date to be fixed later on former Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman's preliminary objection to strike out the election petition filed by Parti Warisan Sabah (Warisan) to nullify his victory in the Kimanis parliamentary seat in the recent general election.High Court Judge Supang Lian made the decision after hearing submissions from all parties regarding the application to strike out the petition, Thursday.Anifah, the returning officer and Election Commission were named as the first, second and third respondent, respectively in the election petition filed by Warisan's Kimanis candidate Datuk Karim Bujang.
ADVERTISEMENT
Karim is seeking that Anifah was not duly elected as the Member of Parliament for Kimanis and the said election held on May 9 be declared void.Earlier, Anifah's counsel submitted the summary of the six grounds raised in the preliminary objections.Counsel Ansari Abdullah submitted, among others, on the second ground – the petitioner failed to comply with Rule 12 of the Rules – that the payment of deposit was not made by the petitioner nor any of the five advocates but by a stranger in the form of the legal firm – Messr Szetu and Co."The petitioner in their submission-in-reply stated that this was not raise in the affidavit-in-support. Our reply is that, the failure to comply with Rule 12 of the Election Petition Rules 1954 is question of law founded on the document filed by the petitioner.
ADVERTISEMENT
"This document is filed by the petitioner, so there is no issue of prejudice or surprise," said Ansari.Ansari on the fourth ground, also submitted that the petitioner failed to comply with the requirements of Section 38(1)(a) of the Election Offences Act 1954 as the Election Petition was not presented within 28 days from the alleged corrupt practice committed by the first respondent.
ADVERTISEMENT
Submitting the fifth ground that the petition is not in compliance with Rule 4(1)(b) of the Rules, Ansari said there is non-compliance with Rule 4 by the failure of the petitioner to state the correct dates of the election, the advance polling on May 5 and further polling on May 9.The petition only stated the polling date of the May 9 but the date of advance polling or May 5 was not mention in the petition, argued Ansari.He cited two decided cases, which according to him ruled that the form in Rule 4(4) of the Election Petition Rules makes it mandatory for the actual dates of the election to be stated, failing which the petition ought to be struck out and that the failure of not stating the date of early polling is fatal.Karim's counsel in their rebuttal among other, submitted that the wording of Section 38(1)(a) "since the date of aforesaid" could only be construed as referring to the date stated…which was the date of publication of the result of the election.The High Court in a decided case and the two recent decisions in Sandakan (the Sungai Sibuga and Libaran election petitions) had not given sufficient consideration to the words in the said Section, said the counsel Thong Fei Eng. Section 38(1)(a) only applies where the election, alleged corrupt practice in particular payment of money or act done after the date of publication, the result in the gazette, hence it does not apply in our election, said Thong.On the fourth ground, Thong submitted that there is no ambiguity and no confusion caused to the first respondent or to the court and that by stating the polling date in election petition, the petitioner has complied with Rule 4(4).Counsel Japar Estaban, representing the second and third respondents, informed the court that they were not instructed to raise any preliminary objection on the petition.Together with Ansari were counsel Tengku Fuad Tengku Ahmad and Ridwandean Borhan while Thong were together with counsel Tiong Jia Yiu and Chua Kuan E.Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express’s Telegram channel.
Daily Express Malaysia
