LAMIN MOHD YUNUS, AHMAD FAIRUZ, MOKHTAR SIDIN
DATO SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. constitutional validity of penal charges under existing ordinances post-resolutions. (Para 4) |
| 2. public interest considered paramount over individual relief in legal proceedings. (Para 5) |
Lamin Mohd Yunus PCA:
Leading counsel for the appellant, Raja Aziz Addruse submitted before us that it was an abuse of process to charge the appellant with the offence of corrupt practice under the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance No. 22 , 1970 (hereafter referred to as "Ordinance 22") for the reason that the Federal Government has expressed a clear intention to have it annulled as contained in a resolution passed by the Lower House, the Dewan Rakyat on 22 October 1998. In the Dewan Rakyat that day, the then Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, YB Datuk Hj. Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz spoke thus:
[D.R. 22.10.98 Proceedings p. 141(A)] Timbalan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri [Datuk Haji Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz]: Tuan Yang di Pertua, izinkan saya membentangkan usul pembatalan Ordinan No.22 (Kuasa-Kuasa Perlu) Dharurat, 1970.
Sebagaimana Ahli-ahli Yang Berhormat sedia maklum, Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 telah pun dibentangkan di Dewan ini pada
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.