End of the road for year-long legal battle to challenge the Election Commission’s proposals of redrawing electoral boundaries.
The Federal Court yesterday held that the Election Commission’s (EC) recommendations for a redelineation exercise in parliamentary and state constituencies were not amendable to judicial review.
Chief Justice Tun Md Raus Sharif who chaired a three-man bench said the EC’s action in its delimitation exercise was a mere action that did not bind parties and as such was not amendable to judicial review.
He said this in his decision to dismiss two applications brought by two DAP Members of Parliament from Perak and seven voters from Melaka to get leave of the Federal Court to appeal against the appellate court’s decisions which did not rule in favour of them in respect of their judicial review.
“It is our opinion that the EC had adhered and complied with the principles in the 13th Schedule of the Federal Constitution,” said Raus who presided with Federal Court judges Tan Sri Azahar Mohamed and Tan Sri Wira Aziah Ali.
He said the Federal Constitution instructed the EC to submit to the Prime Minister a report as required under Section 8 of the 13th Schedule of the Federal Constitution.
Raus said ultimately it was up to the House of Representatives on whether to approve the report that was submitted by the EC.
“The Federal Constitution has entrusted the House of Representatives, as a proper body, to decide on the delimitation of constituencies,” he said.
He said it was the court’s duty to uphold and abide the provision of the Federal Constitution.
Raus said if the EC had complied with all the procedures and principles, the court should not encroach on matters pertaining to the delimitation exercise or wit (the court) would be encroaching the functions of other bodies mandated by the Federal Constitution.
He said the applicants could not be given leave to appeal as their proposed questions of law did not satisfy the provision under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.
The case involved seven voters from Melaka who could not commence judicial review to challenge the EC’s proposed redelineation exercise in the state’s parliamentary and state constituencies after the Court of Appeal set aside the High Court order that granted them the leave to initiate the judicial review.
The seven voters in the Kota Melaka and Bukit Katil parliamentary constituencies filed the application for leave to initiate a judicial review to challenge the EC’s proposed redelineation exercise which they claimed was unconstitutional.
They were Chan Tsu Chong, Neo Lih Xin, Azura Talib, Lim Kah Seng, Norhizam Hassan Baktee, Amir Khairudin, and Amran Atan.
The other case were brought by two DAP Member of Parliament (MP) from Perak, Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran and Ipoh Timur MP Thomas Su Keong Siong, who were denied leave by both the High Court and Court of Appeal to commence a judicial review to challenge the EC’s proposed recommendations for a redelineation exercise in their constituencies.
Outside the court, Chan told reporters that following the Federal Court’s decision, the court did not have the power to hear cases involving redelineation exercise by the EC and that the Federal Constitution has empowered Parliament to decide on whether the EC’s proposed recommendation was constitutional.