PUTRAJAYA, Sept 7 — The Court of Appeal reserved its decision on an application by six individuals, including former Undang Luak Sungai Ujong Datuk Mubarak Thahak, to stay the committal proceedings against them pending disposal of their appeal.

A three-man bench comprising Justices Datuk Alwi Abdul Wahab, Datuk Dr Shahnaz Sulaiman and Datuk Amarjeet Singh set September 14 for case management to set the date for decision.

The court also extended the ad interim stay of the committal proceedings granted to the six individuals until a decision is made on their stay application.

A different three-man bench of the Court of Appeal had granted the ad interim stay on July 29 pending today’s hearing on the stay application.

Today, the bench heard full arguments for stay of committal proceedings from counsel Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud, who represented the applicants, and lawyer Steven Thiru, who appeared for the Dewan Keadilan dan Undang Negeri Sembilan (DKU) and its secretary, Raja Norazli Raja Nordin.

The six individuals comprising four Undangs and two chieftains have appealed against the decision of the Seremban High Court granting the DKU and Raja Norazli leave to commence committal proceedings against them for allegedly breaching an injunction order. Their appeal is scheduled for case management on Oct 19.

The six applicants are Mubarak, Undang Luak of Jelebu Datuk Maarof Mat Rashad, Undang Luak of Johol Datuk Muhammed Abdullah, Undang Luak of Rembau Datuk Abdul Rahim Yasin, Tunku Besar Tampin Tunku Syed Razman Tunku Syed Idrus Al-Qadri, and Shahbandar Sungai Ujong Datuk Seri Badarudin Abdul Khalid.

In his submissions, Awang Armadajaya said if the stay is not granted, it would render the applicants’ appeal nugatory.

He said there are important legal issues for determination of the Court of Appeal, including whether the High Court or the Special Court had the jurisdiction to hear the injunction and committal proceedings.

He said if the Court of Appeal decide that only the Special Court had jurisdiction, then the case must be brought before the Special Court for determination and all the proceedings in the High Court would be invalid.

Steven, meanwhile, urged the court to dismiss the stay application and allow the committal proceedings in the High Court to proceed without any delay.

He said established legal principle requires contempt proceedings, once commenced, to be given priority over other proceedings, adding that the applicants should instead seek an urgent hearing of their appeal.

Steven further argued that the applicants have shown disrespect to the court and have interfered with the administration of justice and they should not be granted any relief under Section 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act.

The legal dispute originated on May 5 this year when Mubarak and five others filed an originating summons at the High Court to obtain a copy of the minutes of a special DKU meeting held on April 17. Among the contents of the meeting minutes was a decision to remove Mubarak as Undang Luak of Sungai Ujong.

On June 5 this year, the High Court granted an ad interim injunction to preserve the status quo, maintaining the existing composition of the DKU and Raja Norazli’s position as its secretary, pending the determination of issues relating to jurisdiction and justiciability, or until further order of the court.

However, Raja Norazli claimed that media reports on the same day showed that the plaintiffs, particularly Maarof, had been involved in the purported appointment of the Yang Dipertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan under Article 11 of the Negeri Sembilan State Constitution 1959, despite the injunction order still being in force.

He alleged that the appointment was made in defiance of the court order, prompting the DKU and Raja Norazli to seek leave from the High Court to commence committal proceedings against the six individuals for contempt of court. — Bernama