[ad_1]
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and the Board of Pardons of the Federal Territories have been unable to resolve a lawsuit filed by a lawyer to challenge the legality of the royal pardon that Anwar received two years ago.
The High Court Judge, Judge Akhtar Tahir, made the decision after finding that Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz had locus standi as a member of the public and attorney to file the initial summons.
In his ruling, the judge said that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong had fulfilled his executive function by granting clemency to Anwar and therefore involved procedures and laws where the exercise of executive powers could be challenged.
“If it involves the executive branch, why can’t it be heard and tried in court?” said the judge here on Monday (September 21).
The court also held that there were probable issues that should be heard in their entirety, adding that the case was not a clear matter that could be summarily dismissed.
Judge Akhtar said it was appropriate to initiate the procedure as evidence could be requested, including oral evidence.
“This is a civil matter that must be proven based on the odds. I am rejecting the requests (crossed out) of both defendants without order as to the costs, “he said.
Then, the court set February 18 next year for case management and trial dates were set March 24-26.
Meanwhile, Khairul Azam’s lawyer, Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla, told reporters that the court was of the opinion that his client had locus standi to bring the action, as it had to do with the Federal Constitution.
“As a member of the public, my client has the right to bring the action. And not only that, she is a qualified person, a lawyer and capable of presenting her case, ”said Haniff.
Attorney J. Leela and Senior Federal Counsel Natra Idris represented Anwar and the Board of Pardons, respectively.
On February 26, Khairul Azam, 43, sued the Board of Pardons and Anwar for the latter’s royal pardon in connection with his conviction for sodomy involving Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
Khairul Azam, who is the sole plaintiff, named the Board of Pardons and Anwar, 73, as the first and second defendants respectively.
In his statement of claim, Khairul Azam said that the Federal Court had confirmed on February 10, 2015 a conviction against Anwar in connection with the sodomy charge.
The high court had upheld the five-year prison sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal against Anwar, who then went to jail to serve his sentence.
However, on May 9, 2018, after the XIV General Election and the formation of a new government, the plaintiff claimed that various illegal and unconstitutional steps were taken to ensure that Anwar was pardoned and released from his sentence.
Khairul Azam claimed that two days after the formation of the new government at the federal level and before the formation of a full cabinet lineup under article 43 of the federal Constitution, former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed announced that Anwar received a total reprieve King.
After clemency, Anwar was able to participate in a by-election and was elected deputy from Port Dickson.
The plaintiff maintains that this was against the Constitution, since article 42 (4) and (5) of the Federal Constitution establish that the power of pardon by the King must have the advice of the Board of Pardons.
The plaintiff claimed that it was impossible for a valid Board of Pardons to meet properly two days after the formation of a new government.
Khairul Azam seeks a statement that the Board of Pardons was not legally formed, so his advice to pardon the second defendant, Anwar, was illegal and invalid from the start.
He also requested a statement that Anwar’s clemency was illegal and invalid.
On May 13, Anwar filed the strike petition on the grounds that Khairul Azam has no locus standi to bring the action and that it was frivolous, an embarrassment and an abuse of the judicial process.
[ad_2]
