The Attorney-General’s Chambers today failed in its appeal against a High Court decision allowing the Selangor Pakatan government to challenge the Registrar of Societies’ dissolution of Balkis, the welfare body of wives of elected representatives established by the former BN government.

A three-member Court of Appeal panel led by Justice Ramly Ali, along with Justices Syed Ahmad Helmy Syed Ahmad and Zaharah Ibrahim, were unanimous in dismissing the AG’s appeal.

Lawyers Derek Fernandez and S Selvarajah represented the Selangor government while senior federal counsel Suzana Atan appeared for the AG’s Chambers.

On Aug 10 last year, another panel of the Court of Appeal allowed the AG’s Chambers to appeal to set aside the leave granted by the High Court to the Selangor government and nine others to challenge the legality of the ROS decision to dissolve and deregister Balkis.

Justice Zaleha Zahari, in leading a three-member bench, unanimously dismissed the application brought by 10 applicants to strike out the appeal of the AG against the High Court’s decision.

Justice Zaleha ruled the AG’s Chambers had the right of audience at the judicial review proceedings in the High Court and that it was not fatal that the notice of appeal was filed by the attorney-general instead of the ROS.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court had on Sept 11, 2009, granted leave for an application by the wife of the former Selangor MB, Salbiah Tunut, and nine others over the ROS decision to dissolve Balkis, a welfare organisation of the wives of state elected representatives.

‘Applicants have legal standing’

Justice Mohd Ariff Md Yusof in his decision agreed that the applicants have a legal standing to seek a judicial review over the application to challenge the ROS’ decision to dissolve Balkis.

“The court holds that Salbiah and the other applicants have locus standi to challenge and seek judicial review.

“They are not mere busybodies and have a right as these entities have contributed money to Balkis.

“This matter is also of public interest. The ruling is not frivolous and vexatious,” ruled Mohd Ariff.