The date was set after Justice Aliza Sulaiman heard submissions from counsel representing the applicants — Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Karim and Perak assemblyman Abdul Aziz Bari.
Earlier, senior lawyer Gurdial Singh Nijar, representing the applicants, submitted that the government had breached mandatory provisions under Articles 150(3) and 150(5) of the Federal Constitution, which require emergency ordinances to be laid before Parliament.
“The requirement is mandatory that it shall be laid before the Houses of Parliament — and then it is for Parliament to decide.
“The consequence of not following a mandatory requirement within the structure of Article 150, which deals with proclamation of emergency, means that the government is in violation of Articles 150(3) and 150(5).
“These two provisions highlight the central and crucial position of Parliament as the house that represents the will of the people. These are important principles,” he said.
Gurdial said the ordinances were presented after the emergency had lapsed in August 2021, effectively bypassing Parliament and suspending its legislative functions.
“By laying the ordinances outside the required timeframe, the government had failed to comply with the constitution,” he said.
He claimed that the then prime minister had attempted to perpetuate executive power by relying on Section 11 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance 2021 which, he said, prevented Parliament from sitting, blocked elections, and allowed the pre-emergency executive to continue.
He said such acts undermined the constitution’s democratic principles and were ultra vires Article 150, unconstitutional and illegal, and should be declared null and void.
Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan, appearing for the government and Muhyiddin, argued that the case cannot succeed as it has been overtaken by events.
He said there was no real need for the court to rule on the matter since Parliament had already dealt with and corrected the alleged constitutional breaches.
Shamsul said the emergency ordinances had already been debated and revoked by Parliament on Oct 25, 2021.
“The mandatory court orders sought against the prime minister are also no longer possible, as he resigned on Aug 16, 2021. In short, events have overtaken the cases, and the remedies sought are no longer relevant,” he said.
The case stemmed from Muhyiddin’s 2020 advice to the king seeking the suspension of Parliament under Section 14 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance 2021 during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The suit originally included three other applicants — then opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who is also the current prime minister; former Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul, presently the Dewan Rakyat speaker; and former Pulai MP Salahuddin Ayub.
Anwar and Johari withdrew from the case following the 2022 general election, and Salahuddin was removed as a party to the proceedings following his death in July 2023.
In July 2024, the Federal Court granted leave for Hassan and Aziz to pursue a judicial review.
Hassan and Aziz were also represented by lawyers Abdullah Abdul Rahman and Abraham Au.
New Sin Yew and Abdul Rashid Ismail acted for co-applicants Bersih and the Malaysian Bar, respectively.