Connect with us

Legal

AHTC case: High Court partially disallows AHTC’s new claims made seven months after judgement

Published

on

On 20 August, the High Court ruled to partially allow the amendments to the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council’s Statement of Claim (SOC) in their case against Workers’ Party (WP) then-Aljunied GRC Members of Parliament (MPs) Pritam Singh, Sylvia Lim, Low Thia Khiang, and appointed town councillors Chua Zhi Hon and Kenneth Foo and three others.

The application to amend its SOC came seven months after the Court delivered its judgement on the case back in October 2019.

In essence, the Court has allowed for the amendments made relating to allegations against Mr Singh and Ms Lim, though it also clarified that it found no breach of duties in relation to those new allegations which were allowed. The allegations are that Mr Singh and Ms Lim breached their equitable duty of care and skill by causing AHTC to award the 1st EMSU (Essential Maintenance Service Unit) Contract without calling for a tender.

In the judgement, Justice Kannan Ramesh noted that this amendment related to issues that were already before the court, meaning that the original judgement would not need to be amended.

As for the allegations against Mr Low, Mr Chua, and Mr Foo, the Court did not allow new claims to be made against them.

These claims are twofold. First, AHTC alleged that the three men breached their equitable duty of care and skill in awarding the 1st EMSU contract, and 1st and 2nd MA contract without calling tender.

The amendment, Justice Ramesh says, introduces a new cause of action in AHTC’s suit, noting that “such claims were never originally brought against the 3rd to 5th defendants (Mr Low, Mr Chua, and Mr Foo) in Suit 668 (AHTC’s suit).” In fact, the original claim was made against Mr Singh and Ms Lim only.

Next, the Court also ruled the same way for the amendment which claimed that the three men breached their equitable duty of care and skill in relation to the Payment System as it also introduces a new cause of action.

Justice Ramesh said, “It is clear what has not been pleaded in Suit 668 is that the 3rd to 5th defendants had “approved” and/or “authorised” the Payment System and the payments that were made thereunder. The allegations in this regard are levelled against the 1st, 2nd, 6th and 7th defendants only.”

“There is no allegation that the 3rd to the 5th defendants were involved in setting up the Payment System and processing payments thereunder,” he added.

In his judgement, Justice Ramesh also repeatedly highlighted the fact that AHTC’s case is separate from the one brought against the same defendants by the Pasir-Ris Punggol Town Council (AHTC), despite the fact that they were heard by the Court together.

He stressed, “I reiterate that PRPTC’s claim is framed wider and is against all the defendants. Again, AHTC must have known this; yet, they failed to bring a timeous application to make the necessary amendments. AHTC has also not furnished any explanation for failing to do so.”

He explained that since AHTC’s and PRPTC’s cases were not consolidated, and the fact that the former’s case different from the latter’s, allowing the amendments will also require the original judgement to be amended in order to address these new claims made.

Continue Reading
13 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
13 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Malaysian police seek Interpol’s aid in locating Jocelyn Chia, netizens criticise action as unnecessary

The Royal Malaysia Police plan to seek Interpol’s assistance in locating comedian Jocelyn Chia, according to Bernama.

However, many Malaysian netizens argue that pursuing action against Chia is unnecessary, as it would only give her the attention she desires.

Chia defended her controversial MH370 joke in a CNN interview, explaining that the context was lost when a clip of the routine circulated on social media.

She clarified that the joke was based on the friendly rivalry between Singapore and Malaysia and expressed no ill feelings toward Malaysia.

Published

on

MALAYSIA —  The Royal Malaysia Police are planning to seek the support of Interpol, the International Criminal Police Organization to track down comedian Jocelyn Chia, Malaysian state news agency Bernama reported.

Inspector-General of Police Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani, as quoted by Bernama, revealed that an official application will be submitted to Interpol on Wednesday (14 June).

The purpose is to conduct further investigations under Section 504/505(c) of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

The police’s objective is to obtain both the “full identity” and the current whereabouts of Jocelyn Chia.

Additionally, they have applied to the Malaysian Multimedia Communications Commission (MCMC) for user profiling to aid in the investigation of the comedian’s social media accounts.

“We (police) have also transcribed the suspect’s speech from the video clip,” he said.

Malaysian netizens said action against Jocelyn Chia is unnecessary

However, a significant number of Malaysian netizens have expressed their opinion that taking action against Jocelyn Chia is unnecessary.

They believe that such actions would only serve to give her the attention she seeks, and they argue that allocating resources and taxpayer money toward addressing an individual like Chia would be a waste.

S Arutchelvan, the deputy chairperson of the Malaysian Socialist Party, expressed the opinion that it is unnecessary to waste time on pursuing Jocelyn Chia.

He believes that it is more important to focus on locating Jho Low, referring to the prominent figure involved in the 1MDB scandal, and police should prioritize addressing serious matters rather than comedic issues.

Chia’s insensitivity has drawn heavy criticism from both Malaysians and Singaporeans

Chia, in her controversial performance, portrayed Malaysia as an ex trying to reconnect with Singapore after the nations’ separation in 1965.

In a particularly distasteful jest, she associated Malaysia’s attempt to ‘visit’ Singapore with the tragic MH370 incident.

Her remarks were met with disapproval by the audience, but she unapologetically responded, “What? Malaysian Airlines going missing is not funny, huh? Some jokes don’t land. This joke kills in Singapore.”

Chia’s insensitivity has drawn heavy criticism from both Malaysians and Singaporeans, many of whom regard her comments as a stark reminder of the ongoing pain of the MH370 tragedy for victims and their families.

Chia defended her joke

Chia mentioned that Malaysian audience members often approach her after shows to express their enjoyment, indicating that they “did not take offense” to her performance.

Singapore High Commissioner distancing Jocelyn Chia as “no longer Singaporean”

Meanwhile, Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan and the Republic’s High Commissioner to Malaysia, Mr Vanu Gopala Menon, also expressed their disapproval of Chia’s comments, emphasizing that she does not represent the views of Singaporeans.

Memon posted on social media to sincerely apologise to all Malaysians for Chia’s hurtful remarks.

“The Singapore Government does not condone words or actions that cause harm or hurt to others and Chia, who is no longer Singaporean, does not in any way reflect our views.”

He reiterated that as closest neighbour, Singapore and Malaysia enjoy a strong and multi-faceted relationship, with deep and cross-cutting ties, “We also have unique historical and close people-to-people ties. ”

“Comments such as those made by Chia are unhelpful and undermine the close trust and friendship that both our countries and peoples enjoy,” Menon added.

Continue Reading

Arts & Culture

Malaysian Home Ministry withdraws appeal against High Court’s 2021 ruling on ‘Allah’ in Christian publication

Malaysia’s Home Ministry has withdrawn its appeal against a High Court ruling that overturned the ban on using the word “Allah” in Christian publications. Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail cited ‘contradictions’ between an administrative order and a 1986 Cabinet decision.

Despite this, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim stated that restrictions remain for non-Muslims in other states, a claim contested by Sarawak state assemblyman Baru Bian

Published

on

MALAYSIA — The Home Ministry of Malaysia has withdrawn its appeal against the High Court’s decision in March 2021, which overturned the government’s ban on the use of the word “Allah” in Christian publications throughout the country.

Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, the current Home Minister under Anwar’s administration, explained that his Ministry made the decision due to “contradiction found between a Home Ministry administrative order and a Cabinet decision made in 1986″.

The court record shows that The Attorney-General’s Chambers, representing the Home Ministry, notified the Court of Appeal that they would not pursue the appeal.

According to Malaysia English media outlet The Star, the Home Minister clarified that the court’s decision was based on an administrative approach and not a theological standpoint, as the court is not deemed appropriate to decide matters related to religion specifically.

“This is because the function of the Court itself is not appropriate to decide matters related to religion specifically,” he explained the matter to the reporters on Tuesday (16 May).

In Malaysia, the legal system consists of both civil courts and Shariah courts, the latter being responsible for matters concerning Islamic law.

The Home Minister said in the 10 March 2021’s judgement, it is clear that the Judge made a decision “based on an administrative approach” and it was found to be consistent with the decision of the Federal Court in the case of the Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur vs the Home Affairs Minister in 2014.

“Regarding this, the Government’s decision not to proceed with the appeal is made on a case-by-case basis; without affecting the facts of each case that is currently in court,” he added.

Saifuddin added that the government intends to review and update a comprehensive directive on the use of words like “Allah” to align with the interests of the multi-racial and multi-religious community in Malaysia.

Malaysian PM acknowledges rights of Christians in Sarawak

In the meantime, when responding to the Home Ministry’s decision to withdraw its appeal in the case, Malaysia Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim acknowledged that Christians in Sarawak can use the word “Allah,” but restrictions remain for non-Muslims in other states.

“The court had ruled (in favour of Sarawak) and we must understand that it is Sarawak’s prerogative,” he said in an event on Tuesday.

However, Baru Bian, a lawyer and a state assemblyman in Sarawak challenged the Prime Minister’s statement, emphasizing that the High Court’s ruling applies to the entire country and not just Sarawak.

“The judgment of the High Court applies throughout the whole of Malaysia,” he reiterated.

One of the high-profile cases in Malaysia

On May 11, 2008, Malaysia’s Home Ministry seized eight educational CDs and books from Jill Ireland Bill, a Sarawak Christian of the Melanau tribe, at an airport in Sepang.

The CDs containing titles including ‘Cara Menggunakan Kunci Kerajaan Allah’, ‘Cara Hidup Dalam Kerajaan Allah’, and ‘Ibadah Yang Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah’, which Jill brought back from Indonesia.

In August 2008, Jill Ireland filed a lawsuit against the Home Minister and the Malaysian government, challenging their decision to confiscate the materials.

This legal battle spanned over a decade and focused on Jill Ireland’s constitutional rights to freely practice her religion and seek recognition for those rights.

A significant breakthrough came on 10 March 2021, when the Malaysian High Court delivered a landmark ruling in favour of Jill Ireland.

The court granted her the right to use the word “Allah” in her religious education, overturning a 1986 directive by the Home Ministry that prohibited its use in Christian publications.

During the ruling, Judge Datuk Nor Bee stated that the four Arabic words, including “Allah,” could be used by Christians in their publications, provided it is clearly indicated as “For Christians Only” on the front page.

The judge deemed the 1986 directive “illegal and unlawful,” as it lacked justification on the grounds of public order or potential confusion.

Furthermore, the judge pointed out that the use of the word “Allah” in Bahasa Malaysia by the Christian communities of Sabah and Sarawak since 1629 had not caused any significant problems leading to public disorder over the centuries.

Sabah church drops its 16-year-long legal challenge 

While the High Court made landmark decision for Sarawak’s Jill Ireland case, Malay Mail reported on Wednesday (17 May) that a Sabah church, Sidang Injil Borneo’s (SIB), has chosen to end its 16-year-long legal challenge against the Malaysian government’s 1986 ban on the use of the word “Allah” in Christian publications.

SIB’s case was linked to the Home Ministry’s 2007 decision to seize and withhold the release of the church’s Christian educational materials containing the word “Allah.”

On 15 August 2007, the customs department seized three boxes of educational materials belonging to SIB at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) airport in Sepang.

Despite SIB’s explanation that the materials were intended for educational purposes within the church and not for sale, the Home Ministry initially refused to return them, citing a directive from 19 May 1986.

However, in January 2008, the Home Ministry returned the publications to SIB with the condition that they could only be distributed if the front page was stamped with the symbol of the “cross” and labelled as a Christian publication.

Despite this, SIB decided to continue pursuing the case, which involved constitutional rights such as freedom of religion, equality before the law, and protection against religious discrimination.

The legal process surrounding the case has been ongoing since 2008 and continues to the present day.

Continue Reading

Trending