Saturday, January 17, 2009
KES MA TZU, ANSARI MULAKAN PENCAK!
KEHEBATAN Peguam Kanan Haji Ansari Abdullah berpencak silat di Mahkamah Tinggi Kota Kinabalu telah terbukti pada 1999 apabila berjaya menumpaskan Mantan Ketua Menteri, Datuk Yong Teck Lee dalam Petisyen Pilihanraya 1999.
Sepuluh tahun kemudian, iaitu pada 13 Januari 2009, sekali lagi diuji di Mahkamah Tinggi Kota Kinabalu dan kali ini melibatkan seorang Mantan Ketua Menteri menentang Ketua Menteri yang berkuasa.
Berikut teks penuh ucapan pembukaan Ansari di hadapan Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Kota Kinabalu, Yang Arif Yew Jen Kie. Defenden pertama, Datuk Seri Panglima Musa Haji Aman diwakili oleh Peguam Negeri, Datuk Roderick Fernando dan dibantu oleh Hanafiah Kassim.
In a nutshell, the Plaintiff is using as Chairman of the Kudat Thean Hou Charitable Foundation.
2.He is seeking for four(4) declarations as mentioned under the statement of claim, apart from damages wits and other consequential relief that this court deems fit and just,. The four declarations are:
a) Letter of approval dated 8th February 2006 issued by the 4th Defendant is valid;
b) Letter of withdrawal dated 15 November 2007 issued by the 4th Defendant is null and void;
c)'Fatwa'issued by the state Mufi is an infringement of upon Article 11 of the Federal Constitution; and
d)1st Defendant had in giving the various orders and directions to the other 3 Defendants had acted mala fide, in abuse of power as the Chief Minister of Sabah and Ultra vires the Town and Country Planning Ordinance and Local Government Ordinance.
3.The Plaintiff shall be bound by Your Lady's ruling in the motion on the issue of validity of the first two prayers, that is, the validity as to the letter of approval dated 8.2.2006 and letter of withdrawal dated 15.11.2007. However this position is without prejudice to the appeal filed by the 4th Defendant and the Town and Country Planning Central Board to the Court Of Appeal on the issue of jurisdiction. In other words, our concession is confined only on the decision of the validity of the two letters and not on jurisdiction.
4. The Plaintiff shall call at least 10 witnesses including the Plaintiff himself and 7 witnesses under subpoena. We shall prove that:
a) The various orders and the directives made by the 1st Defendant in relation to the project were made malafide, i.e malicious expression of power on the part of the 1st Defendant as it was motivated by personal animosity towards the Plaintiff and out of ill spite.
b) The orders and the directives by the 1st Defendant are made ultra vires the Local Government ordinance and Town Country and Planning Ordinance (cap 141) since there was an improper motive, that is to satisfy a personal grudge and to wreck vengeance on the plaintiff; and
c)Finally that the constitutional guarantee to the freedom of religion under Article 11 of the federal Court had been infringed
5. The Plaintiff will show that in his haste and anger, the 1st Defendant had abused the Govt and Umno machineries in Sabah to incite ill will and hatred towards the Plaintiff and members of the Foundation by using false and non existing basis as justification including:-
i) Approval was for a 200 feet Buddist Statue: as stated in Umno circular
ii) The statue was near the mosque as stated in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants letters.
The State govt, the Umno liason committee together with its youth, Wanita, Puteri wings, the Mufti, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants were all like mices following the pipe piper, who was in this case, the 1st Defendant without knowing that the statue was not that of Buddha but a Taoist diety without rectifying the height of the statute, that it, that it was not 200 feet but only 80 feet and it was more than half kilometer away from the mosque.
Counsel for the Plaintiff
(Haji Ansari Abdullah Ali)
13th January 2009.