KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 2): The Seremban High Court on Monday has allowed the Negeri Sembilan Dewan Keadilan dan Undang (DKU) to intervene in the suit brought by 10 former state executive councilors against the state secretary Datuk Mohd Zafir Ibrahim and the state government, to challenge their removal from the executive council.
However, High Court judge Roz Mawar Rozain did not allow DKU secretary Raja Norazli Raja Nordin’s application to intervene in the suit, on the grounds that the DKU’s involvement would be sufficient in the matter.
Hence, Roz Mawar granted permission to the DKU to intervene in the proceedings concerning the former excos’ originating summons (OS) dated Oct 5 this year and named it as the third defendant in the suit.
“The court also orders that a copy of the document with regards to the excos’ suit be given to the DKU by Tuesday (Nov 3),” the judge said.
Originally, the 10 excos — Datuk Mohd Faizal Ramli, Datuk Zaifulbahri Idris, Datuk Mustapha Nagoor, Siow Kong Choon, Siti Nur Umaira Hasim, Datuk Mohd Asna Amin, Datuk Mohd Razi Mohd Ali, Suhaimizan Bizar, Mohd Fairuz Mohd Isa and Datuk Razali Abu Samah — had named Zafir and the state government as defendants.
The filing of this suit further complicates the Negeri Sembilan imbroglio, which started with several Undangs, or customary chieftains, issuing a proclamation in April to remove Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir from office over alleged violations of the state's Adat Perpatih system of governance.
Roz Mawar ruled that the DKU’s involvement in the suit is based on it being the governing body involving the ruler and the Undangs or chieftains, namely Article 28 (1) and Article 16 (3) of the Negeri Sembilan constitution.
Article 28(1) defines the notion of a ruler, referring not solely to the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, as Negeri Sembilan’s constitutional structure defines the ruler as a composite body combining the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the traditional chieftains (the Undangs and Tunku Besar Tampin).
Article 16(3) governs the finality of decisions made by the DKU Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the ruling chiefs, which is considered non-justiciable.
The ruling chiefs here are defined as the Undang Luak Sungai Ujong, Undang Luak Jelebu, Undang Luak Johol, Undang Luak Rembau and the Tengku Besar Tampin.
10 excos committed treason and coup d'etat
Earlier, counsel Steven Thiru, who appeared with David Mathew and Gurjeevan Singh Sachdev, argued that the DKU should be allowed to intervene in the excos’ suit, as the 10 of them, including current Menteri Besar Datuk Ismail Lasim, have been cited for contempt.
Thiru said this follows the DKU and Raja Norazli having initiated committal proceedings against Ismail and the 10 excos, along with the four Undangs and two chieftains, which are still pending.
He added that the 10 excos could not use their suit to challenge their expulsion as a platform, since there is the pending permission to cite them for contempt by the DKU.
“The application to initiate contempt proceedings should be heard first. It is our application that you must answer to me first, as I have commenced committal proceedings against you.
“If they say that we have no right to be heard because the application to cite them for contempt is different from their suit or OS, this is a recipe for chaos to defy the court order,” Thiru said.
This follows the court having issued an ad-interim contempt order on June 5 to bar anyone from participating on behalf of the DKU to make the decision.
“The 10, including the MB, had conducted treason and coup d'etat by announcing Tuanku Muhriz’s removal and announcing Tunku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja'afar replacing him.
“For these reasons, the DKU and Raja Norazli should be allowed to intervene,” Thiru said.
Thiru’s application was supported by counsels Abdul Rashid Ismail of Messrs Rashid Zulkifli, representing Zafir, and Razlan Hadri Zulkifi and Marisa Regina Aris Rizal, appearing for the Negeri Sembilan government.
However, counsels for the 10 excos, Datuk Mohd Hafarizam Harun, Syed Faisal Al-Edros Syed Abdullah and Tan Sri Azhar Azizan Harun opposed the DKU and Raja Norazli from being admitted as intervener, as their clients had not yet been cited for contempt, as at present they are at the stage of being cited, or the applicants are seeking leave (permission) to initiate committal.
They thus argued that the DKU should argue the matter at the committal proceedings and not here.
“What has the DKU got to do with the appointment and removal of the excos?” Syed Faisal said.
In the end, Roz Mawar ruled that although the court is allowing the DKU to intervene, the matter concerning committal (contempt) should be addressed during committal proceedings and not in this legal action filed by the 10 excos.
She noted that the Undangs are also seeking to set aside the permission gained by the DKU and Raja Norazli to cite them for contempt at the Court of Appeal, and the matter is pending this week.