The current delimitation exercise by the Election Commission (EC) is not amenable to judicial review, the Court of Appeal ruled today, in dismissing the bid brought by two DAP lawmakers to challenge it. 

A three-member bench, led by Justice Mohd Zawawi Mohd Salleh, announced the decision after hearing submissions from lawyers Surendra Ananth, along with Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran and Ipoh Timur MP Thomas Su, who had applied for leave on their judicial review application. 

The bench did not make any order as to costs. 

The other two judges on the bench were Justice Abdul Rahman Sebli and Justice Kamardin Hashim.

Senior federal counsels Amarjeet Singh, Suzana Atan and Azizan Md Arshad appeared for the EC.

Both Kulasegaran and Su had named the EC and the government as respondents in their judicial review application, where they sought to declare the present redelineation that does not include Selangor and contained malapportionment, was against the Thirteenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution. 

Following the decision today, the two MPs told the media that the ruling meant that the delimitation exercise is not subject to judicial review. 

"What is the purpose of having a local inquiry then?

"The reason we filed the judicial review was that we did not get any feedback from the EC after its first local inquiry," said Su.

Kulasegaran said he had written a letter to the RC, seeking explanations over the first local inquiry, but there was none given.

“Now the second local inquiry has been held.

“It seems that we could not raise any matter regarding the delimitation in courts,” he added. 

One of the points of contention is the malapportionment in both constituencies, which have 90,000 voters, compared to Padang Rengas which has 29,000 voters.

Under the Thirteenth Schedule, every constituency should be of similar size and have about an equal number of voters.

Ipoh High Court's Justice Che Ruzima Ghazali had last May refused to grant leave to initiate the judicial review application on the two constituencies, ruling that the application was frivolous and vexatious.

Normally, in leave applications for judicial review, the threshold to obtain leave (permission) for the full merits to be heard, is very low.

In May, the Malacca High Court granted leave and stay for judicial review application brought by seven residents against the delimitation exercise.

Last month, however, the COA struck out the Malacca High Court's decision.