Letter to Judge and LA by Speaker

The following letters were given to the Secretary , LA and the press by M.Kula
1) 3.3.2009

The Secretary
to the Judge, High Court of Malaya (4)
Ipoh

Tuan/Puan,

Re : (1) IPOH HIGH COURT SAMAN PEMULA NO. 24-247-09
DATO’ DR ZAMBRY BIN ABD. KADIR & 6 ANORS
v SIVAKUMAR A/L VARATHARAJU NAIDU & ANOR
(2) MAHKAMAH TINGGI IPOH SAMAN PEMULA NO. 24-237-09
JAMALUDDIN BIN MOHD RADZI & 2 ANORS
v SIVAKUMAR A/L VARATHARAJU NAIDU
(DITUNTUT SELAKU YANG DIPERTUA DEWAN NEGERI PERAK DARUL RIDZUAN)

I write in my capacity of the Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly Perak.
I have been informed that my appointed counsel lead by Tommy Thomas that my team of lawyers has been disqualified under the Government Proceedings Act 1956. I am reserving my position on this matter and will be taking legal advice on this.
I hereby state that my position as Speaker of the Legislative Assembly in the conduct of proceedings of the Assembly is immune to the process and jurisdiction of the Court. There are a number of cases from our local jurisprudence: Fan Yew Teng [1976] 2 MLJ 262; Lim Cho Hock [1979] 2 MLJ 85 and others. These cases are clear and decisive that the Courts have no jurisdiction over proceedings of the Legislative Assembly.

Further, in accordance with order 29 of Rules of High Court 1980 that no injunction may be granted to prevent a meeting.
I have written to the State Legal Adviser to request for clarification of the representation of my office and my understanding of the Standing Orders, Perak State Constitution and Privileges. I have given no instructions to the State Legal Adviser office in respect to how he or his representative ought to represent the defence of my office as Speaker.
I am respectfully concerned that there be no conflict between the Courts and the Legislative Assembly which disrespects of the separation of powers which is a fundamental feature of democratic constitutionalism.
I urge that the High Court take cognisance of this and not to pit itself against the demarcation of powers and jurisdiction of the Legislative Assembly and the judiciary which will be unhealthy. As a Speaker I may have to take steps to protect the dignity and privileges of the State Assembly against any party that seeks to impede obstruct or damage its standing.

Yours faithfully


V.SIVAKUMAR
Yang DiPertua
Dewan Negeri Perak Darul Ridzuan



2)
PRESS RELEASE ON LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE
IPOH HIGH COURT SAMAN PEMULA NO. 24-247-09
DATO’ DR ZAMBRY BIN ABD. KADIR & 6 ANORS
v SIVAKUMAR A/L VARATHARAJU NAIDU & ANOR

I refer to the 3rd March 2009 High Court hearing of Ipoh (Originating Summons No. 24 -247 -09 )
My appointed lawyers represented by Tommy Thomas was ruled to have no locus standi under the Government Proceedings Act 1956 by the High Court this morning.
In the past few weeks and days following the notice to convene a sitting of the “Mesyuarat ke-Empat, Penggal Pertama, Dewan Negeri Yang Ke-Duabelas” of the State Legislative Assembly there has not been any communication from the office of the State Legal Adviser that his office is acting on my behalf in the discharge of my office as Speaker exercising my duties under the Perak State Constitution and Standing Orders.
I have not received any communications from Legal Adviser office nor have I given any instructions to the Legal Adviser.
So it comes as a complete surprise that I was informed that the State Legal Adviser submitted and refused my appointed legal counsel.
I understand that there may be applications before the Court on behalf of applicants in the summons that may impair and hinder my performance of my duties as Speaker and which is enshrined under the Perak State Constitution, the Standing orders and Privilges of Assembly of which I have not given my instruction to the State Legal Adviser.

V. SIVAKUMAR
Yang DiPertua
Dewan Negeri Perak Darul Ridzuan
3.3.2009
3)

3.3.2009

The State Legal Adviser
Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang
Tingkat 1, Jalan Panglima Bukit Gantang Wahab
Bangunan Perak Darul Ridzuan
30000 Ipoh

Dear Sir,

I refer to the 3rd March 2009 High Court hearing of Ipoh (Originating Summons No. 24 -247 -09)
My appointed lawyers represented by Tommy Thomas was ruled to have no locus standi under the Government Proceedings Act 1956 as submitted by your deputy Encik Zulkifli.
I would request a confirmation as to the position taken by Encik Zulkifli.
In the past few weeks and days following the notice to convene a sitting of the Mesyuarat ke-Empat, Penggal Pertama, Dewan Negeri Yang Ke-Duabelas of the State Legislative Assembly there has not been any communication from your office that you are acting on my behalf in the discharge of my office as Speaker exercising my duties under the Perak State Constitution and Standing Orders.
I have not received any communications from the Legal Adviser’s office nor have I given any instructions to the Legal Adviser.
So it comes as a complete surprise that I was informed that your legal representative submitted and refused my appointed legal counsel.
Since my appointed counsel was disqualified to act I have not been briefed about the position taken by Encik Zulkifi in respect of submissions taken by the Applicants in the Summons.
I now demand immediately as to what position is to be taken by your officer in respect of the applications now taken in High Court that impacts my discharge of duties under the State Constitution and in what way he/she can make submissions on my behalf in respect of which I have not been asked nor given any instructions .
Please reply with immediate urgency as I believe there are interlocutory applications being heard today and also on 5th March 2009 there are hearings scheduled.
I hereby also request that a certificate be issued to appoint Mr Tommy Thomas, Mr Chan Kok Keong, Mr Augustine Anthony, Mr Leong Cheok Keng and Mr Philip Koh Tong Ngee under S24 of the Government Proceedings Act 1956 whilst I am reserving my rights to appoint my own counsel and to explore an appeal against the ruling made by Y.A. Ridwan JC this morning. Hence, this request is without prejudice to my interpretation of Section 24 (3) that such a certificate is in fact unnecessary.
Kindly respond to my request the soonest as I desire and demand independent counsel which thus far I have not received from your office.

Yours Truly,



V. SIVAKUMAR
Yang DiPertua
Dewan Negeri
Perak Darul Ridzuan