Sulong Matjeraie J:

In the recently concluded Malaysian Parliamentary Election held on 21 March 2004, for the Parliamentary Constituency of P216, Bintulu, Sarawak, Dato' Seri Tiong King Sing (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) was returned as the duly elected candidate with a winning majority of 11,267 votes. He defeated two other candidates, Dr. Lau Hieng Kii and Mr. Chiew Chiu Sing, the petitioner herein.

The petitioner in his petition at encl. 3, seeks to have the election of the respondent declared void on the ground of corrupt practice under s. 11(c) (sic) of the Election Offences Act, 1954, see para. 3 thereof. The particulars given are as follows:

The Respondent, Dato' Seri Tiong King Sing and/or his agents had with his knowledge or consent during the above election printed, published, distributed and/or posted up or caused to be printed, published, distributed and/or posted up advertisements, handbills or posters which refer to the said election and which do not bear upon their faces the names and addresses of their printer and publisher thereby contravening s. 11(c)(sic) of the Election Offences Act, 1954.

Further particulars were provided but suffice it to say that it is not necessary to state them at this stage as the respondent have filed a Notice of Motion at encl. 58, on 20 July 2004 (Notice of Motion) seeking for the Election Petition dated 5 May 2004 at encl. 3, be struck out or dismissed with costs. The said Notice of Motion was supported by an Affidavit in support I deposed by learned counsel, Mr. Ling Kuong Meng and affidavit in support II deposed by the respondent. Both affidavits were affirmed on 20 July 2004.

Learned leading counsel for the respondent, Encik Mohamad Ariff bin Md. Yusof submitted to this court that altogether there are eight preliminary objections but as the respondent was withdrawing the issue pertaining to the need for the petitioner to comply with the mandatory provisions of s. 7(1) of the Court of Judicature Act 1964 and coupled with the fact that some of his grounds overlap with each other, he has decided to combine them and thus reducing the issues to four (4) main head of issues, which I will address to shortly. This hearing is therefore the hearing of the Notice of Motion and the preliminary objections.

On the day set down for the hearing of the Notice of Motion, another Notice of Motion filed by the petitioner at encl. 66 seeking to amend the petition was also scheduled to be heard on the same day and at the same time. Both counsel addressed this court on this matter.

Learned leading counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Wong Ho Leng urged this Court to hear both motions together and offered the cases of Mohd Nor bin Ismail v. Zain bin Abdullah ; [1988] 2 MLJ 384 and Bong Geok Beng v. Ahmad Nordin bin Mohamed Amin & Anor. ; [1980] 1 MLJ 167 as his authorities.

After hearing both parties, I ruled that, as two fundamental issues of firstly the locus standi of the learned counsel for the petitioner and secondly, the question of limitation as to when the Election Petition should have been filed will have to be determined first, the Notice of Motion at encl. 58 will have to be heard first. In the event that the respondent fails in his objections, then encl. 66 will be heard immediately thereafter.

Facts Not In Dispute

(1) The Parliamentary Election was held on 21 March 2004;

(2) The election result for Parliamentary constituency of P216 Bintulu was published in the Government Gazette on 12 April 2004 [PU(B) 178];

(3) The Election Petition was filed on 5 May 2004;

(4) The petitioner had only filed one (1) set of the said Election Petition on 5 May 2004 and did not leave two copies thereof with the court; and

(5) The petitioner had filed the Appointment of Advocate by the Petitioner without having the same duly stamped with the stamp duly paid under the law.

The petitioner is deemed to have admitted on the above material facts as it is settled law that any facts asserted which