Social reform group Aliran has described a judge's decision to dismiss an election petition on the grounds that the petition was "improperly filed" as a denial of justice merely on bureaucratic formalities.

Aliran president P. Ramakrishnan in a statement today questioned why justice must depend solely upon technicalities and bureaucracy before it can be addressed.

"What about the issue of justice itself when a grievous wrong has been committed? Should a litigant who is a victim of gross injustice be denied his just dues simply because his lawyer had inadvertently failed to observe certain bureaucratic requirements?"

On Wednesday in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur, Justice Augustine Paul dismissed a Parti KeADILan Nasional member Ramely Mansor's election petition to nullify last year's election result for the Wangsa Maju parliamentary seat.

Paul ruled that the onus was on Ramely to leave two copies of the petition (plus the original) wiith the court registry as required under the Election Petition Rules.

As only one copy was left at the registry, the third respondent Zulhasnan Rafique (who won the contest beating KeADILan's Marina Yusoff by 5,718 votes) was not served the petition as required by law.

Ramakrishnan asked if the technical "violation" in the case was so "fatal" that it could not be rectified without sacrificing justice.

"Thinking Malaysians would want to know whether it is within the powers of the court to postpone the suit, order the petitioner to submit the additional copy of the petition to the court registry, and fix a new date for hearing the petition," he added.

If the judge has adjourned the hearing instead, his action would have enhanced the prestige of the court and instilled confidence in the country's system of justice, Ramarishnan said.