Two Perak DAP MPs have mounted a challenge against the Election Commission's (EC) redelineation exercise in the state, including on the ground that the first local inquiry held for the constituencies of Ipoh Barat and Ipoh Timur were unlawful.

Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran and Ipoh Timur MP Thomas Su, appeared with lawyer Surendra Ananth in the leave (permission) for judicial review application before Ipoh High Court judge Justice Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali.

Kulasegaran and Su are seeking an order to quash the EC's notice dated March 8, entitled “Notice of Proposed Recommendations for the Federal and State Constituencies in the States of Malaya (Except the State of Selangor), the proposed recommendations for the state (Perak) and parliament seats in the two constituencies.

They are further seeking a declaration that the notice and proposed recommendations were issued without jurisdiction and were unconstitutional.

The duo, who are also lawyers, said the present re-delineation is inconsistent with Section 2(c) and (d) of the 13th Schedule of the Federal Constitution, as it was done irrationally and was disproportionate as they are not done with equal number of voters within the constituencies.

They further argued that it is inconsistent with Article 8 of the Federal Constitution regarding equality and that the EC had failed to provide reasons for objections made during the local inquiries.

Hence, they further argued that the local enquiries presently conducted are procedurally improper as it also does not include the state of Selangor.

The EC, which was represented by Suzana Atan, Shamsul Bolhassan and Azizan Md Arshad, told the court that enquiries are not final, where they cited the VK Lingam case that was decided by the Federal Court that ruled tribunals or quasi-judicial bodies are not bound by the judicial review.

They also cited the Nurul Izzah Anwar's challenge where the Court of Appeal ruled that leave should not be granted. The government lawyers also cited the See Chee How case where sufficient information was provided in the notice.

In reply, the lawmakers said if the judicial review is not allowed, it would be deemed academic if the proposed amendments are given to the prime minister and later tabled in Parliament.

Justice Che Mohd Ruzima fixed May 5 to deliver his decision whether leave should be granted.