Pakatan Harapan de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim has today filed a legal challenge at the Federal Court against three laws that abrogate the mandatory requirement for bills to be assented to by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

Anwar is seeking to have the three laws, which were introduced between 1983 and 1994, be declared unconstitutional for affecting the basic structure of the Federal Constitution.

He is also challenging the constitutionality of the National Security Council (NSC) Act 2016, which was implemented without royal assent.

His lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya from the law firm of Daim and Gamany filed the notice of motion at the Federal Court this morning.

Also present were PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Petaling Jaya Selatan MP Hee Loy Sian, and Johor PKR chief Hassan Karim.

In the application, Anwar sought a declaration that Section 12 of the Constitutional Act 1983 (Amendment), Section 2 of the Constitutional Act 1984 (Amendment) and Section 8 of the Constitutional Act Amendment 1994 are ultra vires (beyond the powers) of Article 4(1) of the Federal Constitution, given that Parliament arguably has no right to pass such amendments.

Article 4(1) of the Federal Constitution emphasises the supremacy of the Constitution, and that any law passed after Merdeka Day that is inconsistent with the Constitution will be rendered void.

Besides this, the former opposition leader is also seeking a declaration that the NSC Act, which was implemented without the assent of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, be declared null and void and with no effect.

He named the Malaysian government as the sole respondent in the action.

Surendran said as this is an Article 4 challenge, Anwar has directly come to the Federal Court to seek legal redress.

Restoring royal assent

In Anwar's supporting affidavit, the 70-year-old said he sought leave from the apex court under Article 4(4) of the Federal Constitution to begin this proceeding.

He noted that Article 66(4) of the Federal Constitution stipulates: “The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall within 30 days after a Bill is presented to him assent to the Bill by causing the Public Seal to be affixed thereto.”

Anwar said the three Acts he cited in the application had resulted in Article 66(4A) being inserted into the Constitution, namely: “If a Bill is not assented to by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong within the time specified in Clause 4, it shall become law at the expiration of the time specified in that Clause”.

The politician said Article 66(4) is an important basic structure in the Federal Constitution, and that the amendment to Article 66(4) through the insertion of Article 66 (4A) has violated the basic structure of the Federal Constitution by eliminating the need for royal assent.

“The Parliament does not have the powers to formulate such laws which violate the basic structure of the Federal Constitution as stipulated under Article 4(1), which states that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with the Constitution shall be void,” he said.

Anwar also argued that the NSC Act, which came into force on Aug 1, 2016, is not consistent with Article 149 of the Federal Constitution.

“My lawyers will argue in court over the unconstitutionality of the Act and why it should be declared null and void, as it is enforced under Article 66 (4A) which has been introduced following the amendments,” he said.

Anwar had previously filed a challenge against the NSC Act in the High Court and Court of Appeal on Aug 2, 2016.

He added that following this, he had been forced to file the current judicial challenge and he has the locus standii (legal standing) to challenge the three Acts which resulted in Article 66(4A) being enforced.

Commenting on the application, Wan Azizah said despite the reservations expressed by the Conference of Rulers over the NSC Act, it had been bulldozed through without royal assent.

“For this reason, my husband is making this challenge to restore the need for the royal assent as stipulated in the Federal Constitution,” she said.