PPBM fails to challenge RoS’ decision

RoS director-general Surayati Ibrahim holds the temporary suspension order that was issued to PPBM under Section 14 (5) of the Societies Act 1966.
RoS director-general Surayati Ibrahim holds the temporary suspension order that was issued to PPBM under Section 14 (5) of the Societies Act 1966.

KUALA LUMPUR, April 11 — Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (PPBM) today failed to obtain leave for judicial review of the Registrar of Societies (RoS) director-general’s decision to temporarily dissolve the party.

Earlier, High Court judge Datuk Wira Kamaludin Md Said allowed the preliminary objection raised by senior federal counsel Suzana Atan and Maisarah Juhari who acted for the D-G, Surayati Ibrahim, against the application filed by PPBM through its secretary-general Datuk Shahruddin Md Salleh.

He then ruled that the application to challenge the Notice issued by the respondent to the party under Section 14(2) of the Societies Act 1966 had become academic.

The application, said the judge, could be considered alive only if the applicant had not been able to comply with the notice because it was not given enough time or there was an issue in backdating the notice.

“There is no issue because there was compliance to the Section 14(2) Notice within time,” he said.

The judge further said since the notice was no more an issue or academic, the challenge, if any must be against the provisional order issued by the respondent (Surayati) under Section 14(5).

“The applicant may argue that the Section 14(5) provisional order was wrongly issued by the respondent because this section has been wrongly interpreted. It does not apply because the applicant has furnished particulars as required under the Section 14(2) Notice.

“Therefore, in my opinion this is a separate issue which requires different application to challenge the legality of the respondent’s decision to issue the Provisional Order under Section 14(5),” he added.

Nevertheless, Kamaludin said the applicant was not left without remedy and could still appeal under Section 18 of the act, or on special circumstances (when there was no minister) could file a judicial review application to challenge the respondent’s Section 14(5) decision.

Dismissing the case without costs, the judge said the applicant still had time to file an appeal.

In the application filed on April 6, this year PPBM sought among others, an order to prohibit the respondent from wrongfully issuing an order to dissolve the party under Section 14(5) of the Societies Act as well as an order to prohibit any action to prevent PPBM from existing as a legal political party.

The party wanted a declaration that the respondent’s order made under Section 14(2) for PPBM to submit the minutes of its annual general meeting dated February 28, 2018, was illegal.

The party further sought a declaration that PPBM was a registered political party and had the right to carry out activities to contest in the 14th general election.

On April 5, PPBM was ordered to be temporarily dissolved for 30 days for failing to fulfil the February 28 notice to submit documents on its AGM.

Meanwhile, lawyer Rosli Dahlan, who represented PPBM said the party would file an appeal over today’s decision as well as file a fresh application. — Bernama

Related Articles