Malaysia
Peter Anthony’s election petition struck out
Judge Dean Wayne Daly ruled that Peter Anthonys (pic) election petition did not comply with Rule 4(1)(b) of the Election Petition Rules, read with Section 32(b) of the Election Offences Act, and struck out the petition with costs of RM 20,000. ― Bernama pic

KOTA KINABALU, March 15 — The Election Court today struck out Parti Kesejahteraan Demokratik Masyarakat president Datuk Peter Anthony’s election petition against Tenom MP Reduan Rubin Balang for failing to prove there was any breach of procedure.

Judge Dean Wayne Daly ruled that Peter’s election petition did not comply with Rule 4(1)(b) of the Election Petition Rules, read with Section 32(b) of the Election Offences Act, and struck out the petition with costs of RM 20,000.

Advertising
Advertising

"The judge said Peter had failed to provide sufficient facts and particulars to support his allegations that there was a breach of election law,” said counsel for Reduan Tengku Datuk Fuad Ahmad.

"The judge had also ruled that Peter was a convicted criminal under Article 48(1)(e) at the time of nomination and was therefore disqualified under Article 48(5) of the Federal Constitution from contesting in GE15.”

Peter is also Melalap assemblyman.

Earlier, Peter’s lawyer Datuk Ansari Abdullah, argued that Article 48(5) did not apply to his client because he had obtained a stay of conviction from the Sessions Court.

Fuad argued that Article 48(5) applies immediately upon conviction and that a person remains disqualified until and unless the conviction is overturned on appeal.

"As long as a person remains convicted, he or she is disqualified from contesting in an election. It is irrelevant that there has been a stay of conviction because a stay only suspends the effects of conviction — it does not cause the conviction to disappear’ said Fuad.

Senior Federal Counsel Donald Joseph Franklin, acting for the returning officer and the Election Commission (EC), also argued that the Indian Supreme Court cases cited by Ansari were irrelevant because they were based on the Indian Constitution which does not contain any provisions that are identical or similar to Article 48(5) of the Federal Constitution.

Federal Counsel Asliza Ali also appeared for the returning officer and the EC.

On November 5, a riot broke out at the nomination centre in Tenom after Peter’s nomination papers were rejected on Nomination Day for the 15th general election last year.

He told reporters that he was confused when the EC pulled back his nomination papers after approving them and allowing him to pull a candidate number.

The police had to intervene with tear gas to disperse an angry crowd of supporters who turned aggressive as soon as they found out Anthony’s nomination papers had been rejected.

Related Articles

 

You May Also Like