Monday 11 December 2023

Mahkamah Tinggi juga boleh membuat tafsiran kepada Perlembagaan?

 BERSIH & ADIL NETWORK SDN BHD & ORS v. TAN SRI DATO' HJ MAHIADDIN MD YASIN & ANOR; KHAIRIL NIZAM KHIRUDIN & ORS (INTERVENERS) AND ANOTHER CASE [2022] 7 CLJ 905

HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
AHMAD KAMAL MD SHAHID J
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NOS: WA-24-6-02-2021 & WA-24-22-04-2021]
04 JULY 2022

The power to interpret constitutional provisions is not exclusive to the Federal Court. Under the constitutional scheme, the Federal Court is generally a court of last resort for all constitutional questions. It is only in a narrow category of exceptional cases - those expressly stipulated in art. 128(1) of the Federal Constitution - that such questions must be determined by the Federal Court at first instance

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGqQJrPngPbWgkPqjmZBNzXHlKr

Namun boleh bandingkan dengan kes ini.

TEO CHEE KONG v. PP [2021] 8 CLJ 29
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
MOHAMAD ZABIDIN MOHD DIAH JCA; RAVINTHRAN PARAMAGURU JCA; LEE HENG CHEONG JCA
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: S-06A-18-06-2018]
14 JUNE 2021

The power of the High Court under s. 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 is discretionary. The High Court is not duty bound to refer the constitutional questions posed by a party to the Federal Court in all cases. It is also unnecessary for the High Court to proffer any answer, 'negative' or 'affirmative' to the constitutional questions brought before it.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGkbDdlnmvtmmRFbWzTWgQQsNWL


No comments:

Post a Comment

Pengelakan secara sengaja menjawab soalan dari operator insurans boleh menyebabkan tuntutan pampasan dibatalkan

  CHONG LAI KENG v. PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE MALAYSIA BHD   [2024] 1 CLJ 293 HIGH COURT MALAYA, SHAH ALAM JAMHIRAH ALI JC [CIVIL SUIT NO: BA-22N...