SEREMBAN - The High Court here today allowed the Dewan Keadilan dan Undang Negeri Sembilan (DKU) to be added as the third defendant in an originating summons (OS 596) challenging the appointment of the 10 former state executive council (Exco) members.
Judge Roz Mawar Rozain, however, dismissed DKU’s secretary Raja Norazli Raja Nordin’s application to be included as the defendant in the OS in his personal capacity, ruling that he failed to demonstrate any personal legal right or liability that would be directly affected.
The judge held that the DKU has established a direct legal interest of a constitutional character in the subject matter of the OS.
"First, I find an order identifying the ruling chiefs holding office on the Sept 20 would either proceed on the DKU's advice of the Aug 1 and Sept 13, or go behind it. Whether that advice is final and immune from challenge under Article 16(3) is a question that touches the DKU's constitutional function directly," she said during the proceeding held via Zoom.
The judge further noted that because the ruling chiefs are members of the DKU under Article 17, a declaration as to who they are would, in substance, determine the DKU's own composition.
"These are legal interests of a constitutional character, not commercial ones. They arise in the subject matter of the originating summons itself as defined by prayer 3, question 5, and the plaintiffs' own evidence, and not in some neighbouring controversy.
"So, the DKU's presence is necessary to ensure this matter, which is likely to arise, is effectually and completely determined," she added.
The 10 former Negeri Sembilan Exco members as the plaintiffs had filed the OS over the interpretation of the State Constitution and named the Negeri Sembilan State Secretary and the state government as the defendants in the case.
The court noted that while the DKU has no function concerning the appointment or revocation of Exco members, its interest lies in the interpretation and application of the term "Ruler" in Article 28(1).
Following the decision, the court recorded the confirmation by counsel for the plaintiffs that OS 596 proceeds without inviting the court to determine the validity of the proclamation of April 19 or who holds the office of Yang Dipertuan Besar.
Earlier, counsel for the plaintiffs, Datuk Syed Faisal Al-Edros Syed Abdullah submitted that the intervention application should be dismissed, arguing that the proposed interveners had failed to establish any direct legal right or interest in the subject matter of OS 596.
He said OS 596 concerned solely a constitutional question, namely the validity of the revocation of the plaintiffs’ appointments as members of the State Executive Council under Articles 28, 38 and 40 of the State Constitution, which was entirely distinct from the contempt allegations raised in OS 240.
The plaintiffs were also represented by counsels Tan Sri Azhar Azizan Harun, Datuk Mohd Hafarizam Harun, Norhazira Abu Haiyan and Muhammad Luqman Hakeem Abas.
Counsel for the proposed interveners (DKU and its secretary), Steven Thiru, opposed the submission, arguing that a party facing an application for leave to commence committal proceedings in one court must first comply with court orders before seeking substantive constitutional relief in another court.
He further submitted that the DKU, as an essential constitutional body comprising the Ruling Chiefs under Article 28(1) of the State Constitution, had a clear and subsisting legal interest in participating in the proceedings.
Also representing DKU were counsel David Mathew, Shafrin Halim and Gurjeevan Singh
The court then fixed Nov 16 to hear a preliminary objection by the defendants challenging the use of the OS to initiate the proceedings, saying that the matter should instead have been brought through judicial review. - BERNAMA