KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has set July 20 to hear Hulu Selangor MP P. Kamalanathan’s bid to strike out an application by Federal Territory PKR chief Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim for the Hulu Selangor election results to be nullified on grounds of corrupt practice.
The court also fixed the same day to hear a preliminary objection raised by the Election Commission over the petition.
Justice Azahar Mohamed set the date in chambers after meeting the parties involved yesterday.
Counsel Datuk Mohd Hafarizam Harun, Firoz Hussein Ahmad Jamaluddin and Cheng Mai acted for Kamalanathan; lawyers Ang Hean Leng, Leong Sher How and Azhar Azizan Harun for Zaid; and Senior Federal Counsel Suzana Atan and SFC Mohd Azhar Mohd Yusof for the Election Commission.
Zaid had named Kamalanathan, Hulu Selangor parliamentary constituency returning officer Nor Hisham Ahmad Dahlan and the Election Commission as respondents in his petition to strike out the results of the by-election held on April 25.
Barisan Nasional’s Kamalanathan defeated Zaid by a 1,725-vote majority.
In his petition filed at the Shah Alam High Court on May 24, Zaid, 59, contended that there were acts of corrupt practice in the form of bribery in the by-election.
The former Cabinet minister, who wants a declaration that Kamala-nathan was not duly elected as the Hulu Selangor MP, is seeking determination and directions under Section 36 of the Election Offences Act, costs and any further relief deemed fit by the court.
Kamalanathan filed a notice of motion on July 1, asking that Zaid’s election petition be struck out on the grounds that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
Among others, Kamalanathan said the court could use its inherent jurisdiction to strike out the petition due to Zaid’s failure to comply with various rules in the Election Petition Rules.
Kamalanathan said Zaid had failed to identify the purported persons to whom the purported promises were made and/or failed to give particulars to show that they were registered voters of the Hulu Selangor parliamentary constituency and how the alleged bribery had so extensively prevailed that it was reasonably supposed to have affected the election results.
He added that the it was scandalous, vexatious and might embarrass the fair trial of the action and/or was an abuse of the court process.
Did you find this article insightful?