PUTRAJAYA, July 17 (Bernama) -- Hindraf Makkal Shakti (Hindraf) loses its
appeal today to set aside a High Court''s refusal to grant it leave to initiate a
judicial review application pertaining to a decision in not approving and
registering the group as a non-governmental organisation (NGO).
Court of Appeal''s three-member panel chaired by Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin
ruled that Hindraf''s appeal was academic in view of the Registrar of Societies''
(ROS) letter dated Sept 22 last year to reject its application to be registered
as a NGO.
Justice Abu Samah said the court agreed with the decision of the High Court
judge and that Hindraf had not shown that he had erred in law and in fact in his
decision.
The panel, also comprising Justices Datuk Alizatul Khair Osman Khairuddin
and Datuk Lim Yee Lan unanimously dismissed Hindraf''s appeal and ordered it to
pay RM5,000 in legal costs.
Hindraf was appealing against the decision made by Judge Abang Iskandar
Abang Hashim on June 30 last year denying it leave to file a judicial review
application on the ground that the ROS had not made any decision pertaining to
Hindraf''s registration.
-- MORE
COURT-HINDRAF 2 (LAST) PUTRAJAYA
Hindraf secretary P. Ramesh in his application filed on May 25 last year,
named the Premier, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein, the
Registrar of Societies (ROS) of Malaysia and the Federal Territory ROS as
respondents.
Ramesh sought a certiorari order to set aside the decision of the
respondents presumed to be given on April 24 last year and a mandamus order to
compel the respondents to approve and register Hindraf as an NGO.
Hindraf claimed the respondents had refused to reply to its application to
be approved and registered as NGO.
In his supporting affidavit, Ramesh said the application to register Hindraf
as an NGO was made on Oct 2, 2009 and that the application was made based on the
rights of freedom and equality as provided under Article 10(1)(C) and Article 8
of the Federal Constitution.
The panel accepted the submission by Senior Federal Counsel Noor Hisham
Ismail representing the respondents that the appeal was academic in view of the
ROS'' letter.
He said Hindraf''s application for leave to file a judicial review was
premature.
Lawyer P.Uthayakumar, who is also Hindraf''s legal adviser, argued that the
ROS'' letter was not in the record of appeal as the letter came after the High
Court delivered its decision.
Uthayakumar said Hindraf would bring the matter up to the Federal Court.
-- BERNAMA
JA AKT AO
