Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim 1. Government of Malaysia 2. The National Security Council

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim 1. Government of Malaysia 2. The National Security Council

The Federal Court declined to answer the referred constitutional questions because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate an actual controversy affecting his rights; the questions were abstract and academic absent allegation that the Amending Provisions or the NSCA had been used or posed a real credible threat to the plaintiff, hence the Court remitted the matter to the High Court.

Citation
06(RS)-1-03/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim; Respondent/defendant: Government of Malaysia; Respondent/defendant: National Security Council
Court
RS
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 February 2020
Case Number
06(RS)-1-03/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Reference Under Section 84 Courts of Judicature Act (special Case) / Federal Court Determination on Special Case (section 84 Cja); Decision to Decline Answering and Remit to High Court
Outcome
Federal Court declined to answer the constitutional questions referred under section 84 CJA and remitted the case to the High Court.
Legal Topics
Validity of Constitutional Amendments, Basic Structure Doctrine, Constitutionality of Legislation, Standing and Locus, Abstract Versus Concrete Judicial Review, National Security Council Act 2016, Section 84 Courts of Judicature Act
Source Language
Malay/English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Statutory Interpretation Validity of Constitutional Amendments Basic Structure Doctrine Constitutionality of Legislation Standing and Locus +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim

Appellant/plaintiff

Government of Malaysia

Respondent/defendant

National Security Council

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Reference Under Section 84 Courts of Judicature Act (special Case) / Federal Court Determination on Special Case (section 84 Cja); Decision to Decline Answering and Remit to High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Constitution (Amendment) Acts 1983, 1984 and 1994 are unconstitutional as violating the basic structure of the Federal Constitution
  2. 2 Whether Articles 66(4) and (4A) are unconstitutional as consequential on the above amendments
  3. 3 Whether the National Security Council Act 2016 is unconstitutional on grounds that it was enacted pursuant to unconstitutional amendments, not enacted in accordance with Article 149, or violates Article 9(2) freedom of movement

Ratio Decidendi

The Federal Court declined to answer the referred constitutional questions because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate an actual controversy affecting his rights; the questions were abstract and academic absent allegation that the Amending Provisions or the NSCA had been used or posed a real credible threat to the plaintiff, hence the Court remitted the matter to the High Court.

Court Disposition

Federal Court declined to answer the constitutional questions referred under section 84 CJA and remitted the case to the High Court.

Orders

  • Declined to answer the constitutional questions posed in the special case under section 84 CJA
  • Remitted the proceedings to the High Court for continuation and disposal in accordance with law