Former Nenggiri assemblyman withdraws lawsuit over Bersatu expulsion
KUALA LUMPUR: Former Nenggiri state assemblyman Mohd Azizi Abu Naim has withdrawn the originating summons he filed at the High Court here, challenging the termination of his membership from the Bersatu party.
Mohd Azizi's lawyer, Nur Irdina Syahirah Mohammad Wardi, informed judge Roz Mawar Rozain that the suit was withdrawn as it had become academic, given that the Nenggiri by-election had already taken place, resulting in the election of a new state assemblyman.
Meanwhile, the defendants, including Kelantan State Assembly Speaker Datuk Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah, who was represented by counsel Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud, applied for RM250,000 in costs.
They argued that the case was of public interest and had required significant legal work due to its complexity, particularly with the involvement of the speaker's position, which has wider implications for the country's legislative body.
Counsel Chetan Jethwani, representing Bersatu president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Bersatu secretary-general Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin, who were also named as defendants, sought RM250,000 in costs for both his clients.
"This lawsuit has no merit and would ultimately fail. This is evidenced by the withdrawal of the suit," said Chetan.
Judge Roz Mawar subsequently struck out the suit and ordered Mohd Azizi to pay costs of RM50,000 to Mohd Amar and RM50,000 to Muhyiddin and Hamzah.
Mohd Azizi had originally filed the lawsuit on June 24 last year, challenging his expulsion from Bersatu. He sought a declaration that his termination, communicated via a notice dated June 12, 2024, was unlawful and void, claiming the notice was issued with malice.
Mohd Azizi argued that an amendment to Article 10 of Bersatu's constitution, which allows revocation of membership if a member supports a political rival, was unconstitutional. - Bernama
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
2 hours ago
- The Star
Najib's RM27mil money laundering trial to proceed, AGC dismisses review request
KUALA LUMPUR: The RM27mil money laundering trial involving Datuk Seri Najib Razak and SRC International Sdn Bhd will proceed to a full trial, the High Court has announced. This follows the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) dismissal of a representation sent by the former Pekan MP seeking a review of his charges. During proceedings on Wednesday (June 11), Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Ashroff Adrin Kamarul informed Justice K. Muniandy that the AGC had rejected the representation. ALSO READ: RM27mil SRC case: AGC asks for one more month to decide on Najib's representation On Feb 3, 2019, Najib claimed trial to three charges of money laundering by accepting proceeds from unlawful activities amounting to RM27mil through his three AmPrivate Banking accounts at AmIslamic Bank Berhad, AmBank Group Building, Jalan Raja Chulan on July 8, 2014, under Section 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLATFPUAA) 2001. He faces a maximum fine of RM5mil or imprisonment of up to five years, or both, if convicted. More To Come Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel for breaking news alerts and key updates!
The Star
2 hours ago
- The Star
Anwar granted temporary stay in civil lawsuit
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has allowed an application by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to temporarily stay the hearing of a civil lawsuit filed by his former research assistant Muhammed Yusoff Rawther over allegations of sexual assault. In a unanimous decision, a three-judge panel chaired by Justice Supang Lian said the appellate court was empowered under Section 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to make an ad interim order to preserve the integrity of the appellant's stay application pending the disposal of his appeal against the High Court's decision. The High Court had dismissed Anwar's application to refer eight legal questions to the Federal Court. 'Accordingly, we hereby make an ad interim order to stay all proceedings, including the full trial at the High Court,' Justice Supang said in an online proceeding here yesterday. The hearing of the main lawsuit by Muhammed Yusoff was initially fixed to begin next Monday. Other judges on the bench were Justices Faizah Jamaludin and Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin. Earlier, the panel heard from Anwar's counsel, Alan Wong, that if the full trial proceeds, the effects would be 'irreversible'. 'The constitutional issues raised (in the application) would have been overtaken by events,' he said. Wong submitted that as the appellant was a sitting prime minister, he would be required to divert his attention and resources from the government's business to attend to the trial, causing disruption to his government function. 'To assist the court in appreciating the scale of this disruption, I have instructions to tender a copy of the Prime Minister's schedule during the trial period,' he said, requesting that the document be received under seal. Lawyer Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, who represented Muhammed Yusoff, however, objected on the grounds that any introduction of material should have been done in an affidavit form. Muhammad Rafique also submitted that the trial dates, which should begin on June 16, were fixed a year ago on June 6, 2024, and this meant the appellant had 'very well known' he was due in court. 'The trial is supposed to commence next week. He (Anwar) had more than enough time to prepare for this trial, knowing fully well that everyone has to submit to the court system.' Muhammad Rafique also submitted that the court should consider whether the appeal has any chance or prospect of success. 'Simply put, the appeal is doomed to fail. 'There are no special circumstances (to warrant the stay),' he said, adding that the trial must proceed. On the application to insert the Prime Minister's schedule, the panel said it took judicial notice of the matter. 'We take judicial notice that the Prime Minister is busy and has a full schedule on any day. Therefore, there is no necessity to tender the schedule as proposed,' Justice Supang said. On June 4, High Court judge Justice Roz Mawar dismissed Anwar's application on the grounds that the eight questions failed to meet the threshold for referral under the Federal Constitution and the Courts of Judicature Act. The questions include whether a sitting prime minister enjoys limited immunity from lawsuits involving allegations of personal conduct that occurred before his appointment under Articles 39, 40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution. Anwar's application was in relation to a lawsuit filed by Muhammed Yusoff on July 14, 2021, claiming he was sexually assaulted in 2018. Anwar, in his defence, contended that the plaintiff had lied under oath to authorities regarding the alleged sexual assault. Anwar then filed a counterclaim on Sept 28, 2021, alleging that Muhammed Yusoff had fabricated it to tarnish his political career and prevent him from becoming prime minister. The hearing for a full stay application has been fixed for July 21.
![[UPDATED] Court of Appeal grants Anwar temporary stay in Yusoff Rawther case](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fimages%2Farticles%2FHQ230325ES029_1749531969.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
![[UPDATED] Court of Appeal grants Anwar temporary stay in Yusoff Rawther case](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fassets%2FNST-Logo%402x.png%3Fid%3Db37a17055cb1ffea01f5&w=48&q=75){kind=small}
New Straits Times
16 hours ago
- New Straits Times
[UPDATED] Court of Appeal grants Anwar temporary stay in Yusoff Rawther case
PUTRAJAYA: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has succeeded in obtaining an ad interim order (temporary stay) of trial proceedings in a sexual assault suit filed against him in 2021 by former research officer Muhammed Yusoff Rawther. This means the trial, scheduled to begin on June 16, along with all related proceedings, will be suspended until the full hearing of the stay application on July 21. A three-member Court of Appeal panel led by Datuk Supang Lian unanimously granted the ad interim order after hearing submissions from Anwar's lawyer, Alan Wong, and Yusoff's lawyer, Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali. "We are of the considered view that under Section 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act, we are empowered to make an ad interim order to preserve the integrity of the appellant's (Anwar) stay application pending the disposal of the appeal. "Accordingly, we hereby make an ad interim order to stay all proceedings, including full trial at the High Court pending the disposal of the appellant's stay application," she said in her decision today. The other judges were Datuk Faizah Jamaludin and Datuk Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin. Anwar's application to stay trial proceedings came after Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Roz Mawar Rozain rejected his bid to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court on the immunity of a prime minister from a civil suit. Roz Mawar had also dismissed Anwar's lawyer, Datuk Seri Rajasegaran Krishnan's oral application to stay trial proceedings. Sept 2 was set for case management for the appeal against Roz Mawar's decision that rejected Anwar's referral application to the Federal Court. Earlier, Wong submitted that if a stay on trial proceedings was not allowed, the referral application to the Federal Court would be nugatory. "It is important for the Federal Court to consider the eight constitutional questions as it delves into whether constitutional safeguards are to be implied to protect the functions, institutions and the integrity of the prime minister's office," he said. He said if the trial went on, Anwar, as the sitting prime minister, would be required to divert attention and resources to the proceedings, which would disrupt the business of the government for seven days. Wong argued that there would be no prejudice and irreversible harm to Yusoff if the trial were deferred, as his claims for monetary damages could still be compensated. "But for the appellant (Anwar) and the public office he holds, which is inseparable, the consequences will be real, irreversible and constitutionally significant. "On the other hand, the prejudice to the function and office of the prime minister cannot be compensated in any way. "It cannot be redressed or addressed if the trial proceeded without an appeal being heard or even the Federal Court considering the constitutional questions," he said. In a rebuttal, Rafique argued that the trial dates were fixed a year ago and that Anwar knew very well he was due in court from then. He said the trial would not impair Anwar's capability to carry out his functions as the prime minister. "The prime minister had more than enough time to prepare for this trial, knowing very well that everyone has to submit to the court system. "The trial must proceed, and there is no reason to delay it. When the High Court declined to allow such a stay, it underscored that there is no compelling or special circumstance in this matter. "Moreover, his referral application came 23 days before the trial was supposed to start. "The application to refer to the eight constitutional questions is doomed to fail as they are rhetorical and there is no chance for success," he said. Roz Mawar, in her decision, ruled that Anwar's referral application on the eight constitutional questions was speculative and did not meet the requirements under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act. Anwar had sought the apex court to rule whether Articles 5,8,39,40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution grant him qualified immunity from Yusoff's suit. He had asked the court to decide whether Yusoff's suit would impair the effective discharge of his executive duties and undermine the constitutional separation of powers. Anwar had also requested the court to consider whether the lawsuit impacts his ability to carry out executive duties and undermines the principle of separation of powers guaranteed by the constitution.
