Major Zaidi Ahmad's lead counsel failed in his attempt to get the military court to declare the hearing against his client as a mistrial.

Presiding Officer, Colonel Saadon Hasnan told Hanipa Maidin that he should raise this matter with a higher court.

"This court is not the appropriate forum (to argue on a mistrial).

"This should be done at a higher court. With that, the court orders the defence to address the prosecution's case," Saadon said.

Hanipa ( left ) then apologised and said his only submission to the court today was to seek a declaration from the same court that the hearing proper was a mistrial.

He had previously sought for a stay in the hearing pending a judicial review before the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on Zaidi’s case, but the convening authority of the military court decided to continue with the hearing.

Meanwhile, Saadon also fixed Jan 7 for the military court to deliver its verdict.

He said this is to give time for the court to deliberate and seek opinions on the case and ensure fairness to Zaidi.

Zaidi, who is with the Royal Malaysian Air Force, was subjected to court martial over his public statements regarding the indelible ink fiasco during the last general election.

'Panel member made prejudicial comments'

Formerly the commanding officer of the No 12 Squadron in Butterworth, Zaidi is facing two charges of contravening the Armed Forces Council Order No 13, Year 1961.

One count is for making a media statement on the indelible ink used in the 13th general election without approval from the Ministry of Defence, and the other is for showing official military communications to the media without approval from the Armed Forces Council.

Previously, Hanipa had complained against a panel member presiding in Zaidi’s trial for leaving prejudicial comments on a Malaysiakini report on the case, but was not unsuccessful in getting dissolution on grounds that the court’s impartiality was in question.

Hanipa then applied for the judicial review on Dec 11 against the contravening authority’s decision to proceed with the trial, despite the allegations of bias. The hearing for the leave application is fixed for Feb 5 next year.

As for Zaidi, he had opted to remain silent and refused to call witnesses, despite being ordered to enter his defence, saying he would wait for the judicial review.

However, in view of the Jan 7 verdict, Hanipa said he is considering ask the High Court to hold a hearing on an earlier date, where he intends to apply for an interim stay against the court martial proceedings.

“But now, it is the court vacation. It is very difficult to get a date (for a hearing). Maybe in January,” he told reporters when met after today’s proceedings.