PUTRAJAYA, Nov 15 — PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang remains as Marang Member of Parliament (MP) after the Federal Court here today dismissed the appeal by Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate Jasmira Othman to nullify his (Abdul Hadi’s) victory for the parliamentary seat in the15th General Election (GE15).
A three-member bench comprising Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Federal Court judges Datuk Zabariah Mohd Yusof and Datuk Rhodzariah Bujang held that Jasmira failed to prove his petition beyond a reasonable doubt.
In the court’s unanimous decision, Justice Abang Iskandar said the court had considered the issue of “agency”, which was raised in the appeal and agreed with the decision of the previous Federal Court in the case of Wan Sagar Wan Embong vs Harun Taib that the appointment of an agent must be proven by the petitioner.
“The court is also not with the appellant (Jasmira) on the other issues raised,” he said in dismissing the appeal with no order as to costs.
Jasmira was appealing against the decision of the Election Court in Terengganu on June 27 this year in dismissing his election petition which sought to declare the election results for the Marang constituency as null and void and wanted a by-election to be held.
On Jan 3 this year, the Terengganu UMNO filed petitions to nullify the results for the Kuala Terengganu and Marang parliamentary seats in GE15, among others, alleging that PAS had bribed voters by distributing financial aid from the state government through i-pension, i-Belia and i-Siswa initiatives from Nov 15 to 17, a few days before GE15.
In GE15, Abdul Hadi retained the Marang seat with a majority of 41,729 votes, defeating three other candidates, namely Jasmira, Azhar Ab Shukur (Pakatan Harapan) and Dr Zarawi Sulong (Parti Pejuang Tanah Air).
In the appeal proceeding today, Jasmira’s counsel, Datuk Wira Mohd Hafarizam Harun, submitted that the Election Court judge Hassan Abdul Ghani erred in law and in facts when he held that the Terengganu executive councillors were not agents for Abdul Hadi and that the person receiving the financial aid must testify that he/she was induced to vote.
He also questioned the timing of the distribution of the financial aid through i-Belia and i-Siswa, which was a few days before polling day.
Mohd Hafarizam told the court that his client was not disputing that the financial aid was approved by the Terengganu state legislative assembly, but the timing of the distribution of the aid.
Abdul Hadi’s counsel, Yusfarizal Yusoff, argued that the programmes for the aid distribution were planned earlier and announced even before Parliament was dissolved.
It was not a pre-meditated plan to bribe, he said, adding that Jasmira failed to show that Abdul Hadi had appointed the executive council members as his agents to bribe voters.
