PUTRAJAYA: Former Undang Luak of Sungai Ujong Datuk Mubarak Thahak and five others failed in a bid to halt committal proceedings against them after the Court of Appeal dismissed their application for a stay.
A three-member panel, comprising Justices Alwi Abdul Wahab, Dr Shahnaz Sulaiman and Amarjeet Singh, unanimously dismissed the application and ordered the six appellants to pay RM60,000 in costs to the respondents, namely Dewan Keadilan dan Undang Negeri Sembilan (DKU) and its secretary Raja Norazli Raja Nordin.
The six applicants, comprising four Undangs and two chieftains, had appealed against the Seremban High Court’s decision granting the DKU and Raja Norazli leave to initiate committal proceedings against them for allegedly breaching an injunction order.
Besides Mubarak, the others are 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 of Sungai Ujong Datuk Seri Badarudin Abdul Khalid.
Justice Amarjeet said the committal proceedings directly involved the court’s jurisdiction to prevent undue interference with the administration of justice and to preserve the authority of the court in the public interest.
“In view of their nature, committal applications ought to be dealt with expeditiously in the interest of justice,” he said when delivering the decision, Bernama reported.
He said the issue raised by the six concerning their purported immunity should be determined after, and not before, the substantive hearing of the committal proceedings.
“The very issue ought to be fully ventilated and determined at the committal proceedings during the substantive stage,” he said.
Justice Amarjeet also said the court found that the appellants had not approached the matter with clean hands as they were seeking equitable relief while simultaneously pursuing a separate judicial review application at the Kuala Lumpur High Court.
He said the appellants had failed to disclose to the High Court the existence of the injunction order and the fact that leave to commence committal proceedings had already been granted against them.
The legal dispute originated on May 5 when Mubarak and five others filed an originating summons to obtain a copy of the minutes of a special DKU meeting 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, 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, 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 the plaintiffs, particularly Maarof, had been involved in the purported appointment of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negri Sembilan under Article 11 of the Negri 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 for contempt of court.
