The case management for the public interest litigation was held this morning, Mon 10 Feb, before Judicial Commissioner Ravi Paramaguru.
Both men have taken the matter to Court as loyal readers of the Herald, Roman Catholics, Christians, Sabahans and regular church-goers who attend the Bahasa mass as well.
Marcel, the 2nd Plaintiff, is being represented by Kota Kinabalu-based lawyer Tengku Fuad Ahmad.
Daniel, the 1st Plaintiff, is representing himself. He’s the President of the UK-based Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPIM), an NGO.
The Oct 26 issue of the Herald was subsequently released by the Home Minister for distribution, albeit a bit late to reach regular church goers, but that’s not the point with the duo. Also, they are not concerned whether subsequent issues of the Herald were distributed in Sabah with no interference from the Home Minister or otherwise.
The thrust of the case is that the Home Minister had no business holding up the Oct 26 distribution of the Herald in defiance of the secular nature of the Constitution in Articles 3, 11 and 12 read together.
Affidavits and Statements filed by both Daniel and Marcel in Court show that the case proper extends beyond Oct 26 and seems like a revisitation, albeit with a difference, of the Herald’s dilemma in the High Court of Malaya, the Court of Appeal and the pending Federal Court Appeal.
Briefly, the applicants want the merits of their case to be heard and not be confined to administrative procedures.
If the High Court accedes to their Application on the merits argument, it’s likely to open a Pandora’s Box which will have far-reaching implications involving the law and the Constitution and constitutional documents like Batu Sumpah in Keningau, the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and its annexures, and the 10-Point Solution devised by the Federal Cabinet before the last Sarawak state election to lay the Malay Bible controversy to rest.
Both men, in any case, are not looking for a quick end to their Application in Court. They appear ready to test the parameters in Court right up to the Federal Court if things don’t go their way in the High Court.
Marcel was not immediately available for comments.
Daniel, when approached after the case management, gave a brief statement.
“Where there are rights, there must be remedies,” he said. “The Court is not the place for religious or political issues and this will be made clear through our Application. Allah must not be dragged to Court since the Almighty won’t have the opportunity to defend himself or give a statement.”
The High Court of Sabah and Sarawak, formerly the High Court of Borneo, and the High Court of Malaya are equal but have separate jurisdictions. The High Court in Borneo is not bound by the High Court in Malaya. If the issues are different, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court matters on the Herald would not affect Marcel’s and Daniel’s case.
No comments:
Post a Comment