The disputed Bersatu chairperson claimed that the motions for Azhar and Azalina’s appointments should have been put off for another Dewan Rakyat proceeding.
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and four MPs aligned with him have filed a suit challenging the appointments of Dewan Rakyat speaker Datuk Azhar Harun and deputy speaker Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said.
The five, who are seeking a declaration that the speaker’s position has been vacant since July 13, said the appointments of Azhar and Azalina were unconstitutional as they violate Article 57 of the Federal Constitution and Orders 3, 4, 6 and 47 of the Dewan Rakyat Standing Orders.
In a statement issued by the legal firm representing the five, Law Practice of Rafique, they claimed that proper procedures were not followed in the appointments.
They added that a 14-day notice must be given for MPs to propose names once the positions of speaker and deputy speaker are vacant.
They also said the appointments must go through a process of nomination and debate and be put to vote in order to be complete and legal.
The other four plaintiffs are Jerlun MP Datuk Seri Mukhriz Mahathir, Simpang Renggam MP Maszlee Malik, Kubang Pasu MP Amiruddin Hamzah, and Sri Gading MP Shahruddin Md Salleh.
Azhar, Azalina, deputy speaker Mohd Rashid Hasnon and Dewan Rakyat secretary Nizam Mydin Bacha Mydin were named as defendants.
Dr Mahathir claimed that the appointment of Azhar as speaker on July 13 was invalid because Nizam Mydin had allowed Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s motion to appoint Azhar, despite no opportunity given to MPs to come up with their own candidate for speaker.
He alleged that the appointment of Azalina as deputy speaker was invalid because Nizam Mydin had allowed Muhyiddin’s motion to appoint her without giving other MPs the opportunity to come up with their own candidate for the post.
The disputed Bersatu chairperson claimed that the motions for Azhar and Azalina’s appointments should have been put off for another Dewan Rakyat proceeding.
This is because the 14-day period for other MPs to come up with their own candidate for speaker would have begun from July 13, when the post became vacant.
Dr Mahathir alleged that the date when Muhyiddin’s two motions were tabled, namely June 29, cannot be used as the day when the speaker’s post became vacant, as the two motions were only put to a vote on July 13.
“Nizam’s action to call Azhar to take the speaker’s position was against the constitution and Standing Orders,” he added.
Likewise, he said Azhar’s ruling that there was only one name for the deputy speaker’s post was null and void as, again, MPs were not given the opportunity to put forward other candidates.
He said he was advised by his lawyers that the High Court could hear and dispose of the matter under Article 121 of the constitution.
“The judiciary cannot be seen as interfering in the affairs of the legislature,” he said.
He added that Article 63 which states that the validity of Dewan Rakyat proceedings cannot be challenged in court had not been violated.
“This honourable court has jurisdiction and authority under Article 121 of the Federal Constitution as well as inherent powers to hear and issue orders as sought by the originating summons, and that this does not amount to interference in the legislature namely the Dewan Rakyat, and that it also does not conflict with Article 63 of the Federal Constitution,” he said.
Article 121 deals with the judicial power of the federation of Malaysia, while Article 63 deals with the privileges of Parliament.
On July 13, a motion to remove Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof as speaker was passed by narrow vote, with 111 government MPs in support and 109 from Pakatan Harapan against it.
The decision was announced by Rashid.
Azalina, meanwhile, replaced Nga Kor Ming, who resigned as deputy speaker in solidarity with Ariff.