DATO' SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM v

PERDANA MENTERI, MALAYSIA &

ANOR
[1999] 5 MLJ 193
 Issue
• Whether revocation was done in accordance
to Article 43(5) of Federal Constitution?
• Ministers other than the Prime Minister shall
hold office during the pleasure of the Yang
diPertuan Agong, unless the appointment of
any Minister shall have been revoked by the
Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the
Prime Minister but any Minister may resign
his office.
 Background
• Plaintiff was at the time Deputy Prime
Minister and held the position of Finance
Minister.
• The Defendant was Prime Minister.
• The Def wants to dismiss The plaintiff of his
post in the Government.
 Plaintiffs Arguments
• There was no consent and revocation from
the YDPA himself.
• The letter was written in a tone as if the PM
was dismissing him.
• It was not in accordance of Article 43(5).
 Defendants Argument
• There was no prescribed format for a
revocation letter or notice and no
requirements stating the need of anyone’s
signature.
• In 43(5) of FC it was constitutional because
the YDPA was advised by the PM.
• YDPA’s action and decisions are advised solely
by the PM.
 Facts
• Article 43(5) is seen in the case of Government of Malaysia v Mahan
Singh [1975] 2 MLJ 155 at p 160, Suffian LP said that ) government
employment being for the good of the public, it must not continue when
it is no longer for the public good; it is essential for the public good that
the Crown should not be hampered in dismissing a servant whose
continuance in office it deems detrimental to the best interests of the
state and its good government
• Refer case Samsher Singh v State of Punjab AIR 1974 SC 2192, We are of the
view that President means for all practical purposes, the Minister or the Council of Ministers
as the case may be, and his opinion, satisfaction or decision is constitutionally secured when
his Ministers arrive at such opinion, satisfaction or decision.
• The above case means that the President may secure his post by all
practical purposes to satisfy the decisions of his ministers.
• Article 40(1A), The YDPA has to act on advice of PM.
 The Letter by The PM
Perdana Menteri
Malaysia

Yang Berhormat Dato' Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim

Yang Berhormat Dato',

Dengan dukacitanya saya terpaksa melucutkan jawatan-jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan
daripada Dato' Seri serta lain-lain jawatan dalam kerajaan yang dipegang oleh Dato' Seri sebagai Timbalan Perdana
Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan.

Pelucutan ini berkuatkuasa dari hari ini, 2 September 1998 mulai jam 5.30 petang.
Perlucutan ini telah dimaklumkan kepada Seri Paduka Baginda Yang Di- Pertuan Agong.

Salam hormat,

tt

Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad

2 September 1998
 Findings
• The YDPA only acts on the advise of the PM
• The YDPA had been advised by the PM.
• Mohd Saari J. In my judgment, the letter of
revocation, has satisfied the requirement of
art 43(5)FC.
 Held
• As there was no prescribed format of requiring any particular
person to sign the letter of revocation, the PM himself could sign
the letter to convey the decision to the plaintiff.
• The PM’s letter did not mention or show any signs of the YDPA
being advised but, the King was advised and informed about the
decision. This is shown in the evidenc by the affidavit of the
private secretary, such omission is of no consequence.
• Looking at the facts objectively, the letter of revocation had
satisfied the requirement of art 43(5) of the Federal Constitution.
• The plaintiff's case disclosed no reasonable cause of action and
was obviously unsustainable as there was no law sustaining it.