Shielding fraud behind a Mahathir ouster clause?

Posted on November 25, 2010


On 21st September, in relation to the alleged sacking of PKR former deputy sec-gen Jenapala Perumal subaan, I wrote in my ‘The noose is tightening…’ post :

“I spoke to Saifudin a little while ago, whilst earlier this morning, I spoke to Jenapala and another PKR insider who would definitely be in the know as to the goings-on in the party at the material time.

Jenapala confirmed that he had never received any show cause notice from the party, nor was called to attend any disciplinary committee inquiry. He said that to-date, he has not received any formal notification of any decision by the party supreme council of his sacking and his right to appeal any such decision.

“If I was sacked in February, 2009 as they now claim, why would I join Dato Seri Anwar and campaign in the Hulu Selangor by-elections last April?” , Jenapala asked.

The party insider who spoke to me earlier today confirms Jenapala’s claims.

“Salleh ( the former party Sec-Gen ) would be able to confirm whether any disciplinary proceedings were commenced, but I am very certain there has not been any decision of the supreme council in February, 2009 or before, to sack Jenapala. Something is not right. Saifudin better check his facts”, the person said.

Saifudin informed me that when he checked the records at party HQ yesterday, he came upon a letter issued from HQ to Jenapala of and concerning the latter”s sacking from the party.

I asked who had signed the letter.

Saifudin said that he could not recall and that he would be re-checking to ascertain that fact”.

On 23rd September, in my ‘Was Jenapala sacked or not?…’ post, I wrote :

“PKR Sec-Gen Saifudin Nasution held a press conference yesterday where he reiterated once again that deputy president aspirant Jenapala Perumal Subaan had been sacked from the party. Malaysiakini has the report HERE.

I was on the phone with Saifudin twice today.

In the first, I asked if he had confirmation of the letter that he had told me earlier had been sent to Jenapala to notify him of the latter’s sacking from the party.

What was the date of the letter and who signed it, I asked.

Saifudin confirmed that the letter was issued in February, 2009 and signed by the then Sec-Gen, Sallehuddin Hashim”.

My several attempts to get a copy of that letter proved futile.

Jenapala took the matter of his alleged sacking to court.

He wanted the court to declare, amongst other things, that he was still a member of PKR.

He named Wan Azizah, Syed Husin, and Saifudin as defendants.

The matter came up for hearing today.

To oppose Jenapala’s contention that he was still a member of the party, Saifudin filed an affidavit-in-reply.

In this affidavit, the letter by which Jenapala was said to have been notified of his sacking was finally disclosed.

It is a letter dated 2nd February, 2009 and purports to have been signed by then PKR sec-gen Sallehudin Hashim.

Sallehuddin then filed an affidavit to refute the authenticity of this letter.

These documents have now all been posted at MalaysiaToday.

Sallehuddin emphatically swears that :

  • the letter was never issued or authorised to be issued by him
  • Jenapala was never sacked during Sallehuddin’s tenure
  • the minutes of the meeting of the party politburo on 30/8/2009 bears out that the party was then contemplating whether to suspend Jenapala

Malaysiakini reports today that the High Court dismissed Jenapala’s suit.

According to counsel for PKR, “the judge had found in their favour after a three-hour proceeding in chambers based on section 18(c) of the Societies Act”.

Co-counsel for PKR, Razlan Hadri Zulkifli, is quoted as saying : “The judge is essentially saying, ‘Politicians, take your woes elsewhere’ or else the courts will be filled up with complaints from disgruntled politicians”.

For the uninitiated, Section 18C of the Societies Act, 1966 was introduced by an amendment in 1990 following the mess that UMNO found itself in after the numerous challenges to decisions taken by Mahathir.

Section 18C : The decision of a political party or any person authorised by it or by its constitution or rules or regulations made thereunder on the interpretation of its constitution, rules or regulations or on any matter relating to the affairs of the party shall be final and conclusive and such decision shall not be challenged, appealed against, reviewed, quashed or called in question in any court on any ground, and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine any suit, application, question or proceeding on any ground regarding the validity of such decision.

Basically, Mahathir did not want any decision of the party to be challenged in court.

So he contrived to have the ouster clause that section 18C really is introduced into our law.

Malaysiakini also reports PKR v-p Sivarasa to be quite pleased with the outcome of the case today.

I guess Siva’s viewpoint on ouster clauses has changed somewhat of late.

Can someone please remind me what the ‘K’ in PKR stands for.