PKR president Anwar Ibrahim pointed out that former Pujut assemblyperson Dr Ting Tiong Choon chose to retain his Malaysian citizenship.

"He had to choose one and he chose Malaysia. So we should accept that," he told reporters in Shah Alam this afternoon.

Anwar also noted that the Federal Court did not touch on the status of Ting's Malaysian citizenship when ruling on the Sarawak DAP politician's disqualification for acquiring Australian citizenship.

The PKR leader was responding to Sarawak PAS and Parti Bumiputera Perkasa Malaysia's (Putra) call for Ting's citizenship to be revoked under Article 24(1) of the Federal Constitution.

Article 24(1) states the government "may by order deprive that person of his citizenship" if it is satisfied that the citizen has acquired the citizenship of another country.

The Sarawak state assembly had on May 12, 2017 disqualified Ting due to his dual citizenship even though he later renounced his Australian citizenship just before the 2016 Sarawak election.

Ting had acquired Australian citizenship in 2010.

The House had argued that this violated Article 17(1)(g) of the state constitution which states that a person is disqualified if he had voluntarily obtained or exercised the right of citizenship in any other country.

The Court of Appeal later ruled that the state assembly's move to disqualify him was unlawful. However, the apex court overturned this decision yesterday and disqualified Ting (above).

There will be no by-election as it has been more than three years since the last state election.

'Ruling sets a dangerous precedent'

Meanwhile, Sarawak DAP chief Chong Chieng Jen's aide Michael Kong, who was part of Ting's legal team, said the team held the view that while the disqualification arose upon the act of acquiring foreign citizenship, the said disqualification shall also cease upon its renunciation.

“Upon renunciation, all the advantages and disadvantages attached to foreign citizenship end. However, the Federal Court disagreed with us and we must respect its decision,” he added in a statement.

However, Kong noted that an unfortunate part of the ruling is that the court held that the state assembly's decision is non-justiciable.

“In other words, the conduct of the speaker cannot be challenged in court even if it is a clear contravention of the Federal Constitution,” he added.

According to Kong, this sets a dangerous precedent where the speaker could choose to disregard all basic principles including the separation of powers and res judicata (meaning a matter that has been adjudicated by a competent court and therefore may not be pursued further by the same parties).

“This also opens a Pandora's box where disgruntled election candidates who have been defeated in their election petition may use the assembly as a backdoor to disqualify a winning candidate.

“While Pakatan Harapan is not going to use such tactics to undermine the election results, it nevertheless sets a dangerous precedent for future results.

“Any coalition and/party that holds the simple majority in a legislative assembly can easily move a motion, pass it and thereafter disqualify any of its members without any repercussions.

“We are now on a slippery slope and until another Federal Court decision comes along to overturn it, we are stuck with it,” he added.