Under the new rules for concerts and ‘live’ shows, for example, male foreign artistes are not allowed to “cross dress” when performing in Malaysia. The updated guidelines were made available on the website of the Central Agency for Application for Filming and Performance by Foreign Artistes (Puspal) on December 31 last year. He added that he had consulted all communities, including Muslims and non-Muslims, when drafting the updated guidelines. On March 15, Fahmi said that the government has introduced stricter guidelines for foreign artistes performing in Malaysia to protect local sensitivities. However, he stressed all concerts, either by local or foreign performers, must be properly regulated. That reflects some kind of independence or autonomy that we have here where we can make our own decision,” he said. The British government has not entered an appearance despite the writ being served on the embassy.“There will be no way for them to get the permit if they were to perform in Kuala Lumpur,” he said. Another case management will be held on June 30. Some 11 Sarawakians led by Dorus Katan Juman had filed a suit in the Kuching High Court last year to remove Sarawak from the Federation of Malaysia, but only served the amended writ and statement of claim to the defendants namely Putrajaya as well as the British and Sarawak governments recently.ĭuring an online case management on March 15 before judicial commissioner Alexander Siew, Putrajaya and the Sarawak government had requested a month to file a striking out application and, at the same time, requested that the filing of defence be deferred pending the hearing of the striking out application.īoth governments have been given until April 15 to file the application to annul the suit. Voon opined that Sarawak lost many of its resources including oil and gas and maritime wealth following the amendments to the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) 1974 and a few other laws (the Continental Shelf Act 1966 and the Territorial Seas Act 2012), as well as annual development fund revenue from the Federal government. Voon who is also Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) believed that the best avenue to settle the matter was the court of law, adding that the case may be brought to the Federal Court, which is the apex court in Malaysia. The legal council of the 11 plaintiffs, Voon Lee Shan, stated that the Sarawak government under Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) through the SAG Chambers had also served the necessary legal documents on the plaintiffs yesterday.įollowing the Sarawak government’s action, the plaintiffs have 14 days to oppose the application before the Court. ![]() ![]() SAG had yesterday (April 13) filed an application to strike out a lawsuit in the Kuching High Court brought by 11 Sarawakians to determine the validity MA63 which they insisted was void from the beginning. ![]() “The plaintiffs should vent their grievances at the proper forum provided under international law,” said the source. “The Sarawak government has applied to strike out the case as the High Court has no jurisdiction to hear disputes arising from an international agreement or treaty like MA63. KUCHING, April 14: The 11 plaintiffs challenging the validity of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) should file their case to “the proper forum provided under international law”, said a source in the Sarawak Attorney General’s Chambers (SAG).Īccording to the source, the High Court in Kuching has no jurisdiction to hear disputes involving international treaties. Follow and subscribe to DayakDaily on Telegramfor faster news updates.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |