‘No doubt about Dr Ting’s renunciation of Australian citizenship’

KUCHING: The fact that Dr Ting Tiong Choon had renounced his Australian citizenship on April 4, 2016 before his nomination as a candidate for Pujut in the last state election is an ‘agreed fact’ of the parties of the recent High Court case, said Wong King Wei.

King Wei, who is a lawyer in Dr Ting’s legal team, said the parties of the case who agreed to the fact included International Trade and ECommerce Minister Dato Sri Wong Soon Koh’s lawyer, and the counsels for the state government and the State Legislative Assembly Speaker.

“I wish to reiterate, Dr Ting does not have dual citizenship. He no longer possesses Australian citizenship and he is never an elected representative of dual citizenship,” he said in a press statement yesterday.

King Wei was responding to a statement by United People’s Party ( UPP) that the High Court had not made any decision on the substantive issues pertaining to Dr Ting, who was once in possession of Australian citizenship and its implications.

The statement also pointed out that the Ministerial Motion tabled in the DUN to disqualify Dr Ting was based on three substantive issues - that Dr Ting took Australian citizenship; that Dr Ting signed a Pledge of Allegiance to Australia; that Dr Ting exercised rights as an Australian citizen by being placed on the electoral roll in Australia to vote in Australian elections.

In his response, King Wei said he was unsure whether UPP had properly consulted the lawyer who represented Soon Koh in the case.

In noting that it was necessary for UPP to properly consult the lawyer who represented Soon Koh before making such press statement, King Wei believed that by issuing such statement, UPP was taking a legal risk of being disrespectful to the Court by “twisting the decision of the Court”.

On June 17, High Court judge Datuk Douglas Christo Primus Sikayun ruled in favour of Dr Ting, thus reinstating him as Pujut assemblyman.

In making his ruling, the judge said the DUN was not a competent forum to disqualify any of its members and that only the Election Court could decide on the membership status of any assemblyman as provided for under Article 118 of the Federal Constitution.

Douglas also found that DUN Speaker Datuk Amar Mohd Asfia Awang Nassar had failed to apply the rule of natural justice when dismissing Dr Ting during the May 12 DUN sitting, apart from failing to provide him ample time to prepare his defence before a motion to disqualify him was tabled.

The High Court also said that Asfia had failed to take into account the interest of the 8,899 voters who voted for Dr Ting during the state election last year.