Lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla told Judge Wong Chee Lin today the groups had written to the managing judge of the High Courts on Sept 28, stating their intention to have the suit tried before another judge.
The two groups, Association of Peninsular Malaysia Students (GPMS) and the Islamic Educational Development Council (Mappim), are seeking a declaration that Sections 2, 17 and 28 of the Education Act 1996, and the extent to which they provide for the establishment of vernacular schools using Chinese and Tamil as the main languages, are inconsistent with Article 152(1) of the Federal Constitution and null and void.
“However, we have not received any reply from the managing judge,” Haniff said, adding that his clients wanted the trial to be conducted in Malay.
Wong said she was aware of the recusal intention and that they should file a formal recusal application against her.
“Before you make the application, when I said I had difficulty in understanding, what I meant was the speaker’s accent. I can ask them to repeat themselves.
“It does not mean that I cannot manage trials in Malay. I’ve handled trials where the witnesses spoke in Malay,” she told the lawyer.
Wong added the court was aware that potential witnesses would be giving evidence in Malay and she was not shirking from her responsibility.
Haniff then said they would file a formal recusal application against Wong.
The court then fixed Dec 4 for case mention, after senior federal counsel S Narkunavathy, appearing for the education ministry, told the judge that another High Court in Kota Bharu was scheduled to hear a transfer application to move a similar suit to be tried here.
In Kota Bharu, Ikatan Guru-Guru Muslim Malaysia, represented by its president, Mohd Azizee Hasan, is challenging the constitutionality of Sections 17 and 28 of the Education Act.
For the suit by GPMS and Mappim, 11 political parties and organisations, including MCA, MIC and Gerakan, have filed applications to be made parties in the case. Suhakam and the Malaysian Bar are holding a watching brief.
Haniff later explained to reporters that both organisations were seeking Wong’s recusal because she had “very fairly and honourably conceded that her command of Bahasa Melayu is not strong to follow spoken Malay fluently”.
He added: “Since the subject matter of the plaintiffs case is all about the need to have a one stream national school towards national unity, and to oppose vernacular schools which the plaintiffs believe negates that objective, they also believe that the advancement of the national language must be wholesome, inclusive in courts.”