On 6.12.2013, the ROS by letter, informed DAP Secretary General Lim Guan Eng of the said decision. The ROS also in the same letter advised the newly elected CEC members to refrain from making any decision on behalf of the DAP, saying that he had yet to be satisfied that the said reelection was properly conducted, of which investigations were still under way.
This decision was made by the ROS without first making known to the DAP that there were complaints against it in respect of the said reelection and the details of the said complaints, nor giving the DAP any opportunity to respond in its defence beforehand.
On 20.12.2013, the DAP wrote to the ROS asking it to explain under which provision of law it purported to act in making the said decision.
The DAP made it clear in that letter that it would not be bound by decisions which did not have the force of law and should the ROS fail to respond or provide a proper explanation, the DAP, given the far reaching consequences of such a decision, would take the matter to court.
The ROS received this letter on 24.12.2013 and was given 14 days therefrom to respond.
Despite the significance of the matter and the gravity of the position obtaining, the ROS failed to respond.
This is a reflection of clear and utter disregard on part of the ROS to act responsibly, and to practice accountability and transparency in its decision making process, particularly in its conduct against the DAP.
Silence gives rise to the impression that the ROS cannot justify its decision. It also raises more questions over the legality or otherwise of the said decision and the conduct of the ROS against the DAP thus far.
This leaves the DAP with no choice but to go to court.
We take the position that the decision of the ROS is unlawful. We are of the view that the ROS cannot in the relevant circumstances, refuse to recognise the DAP CEC elected on 29 September 2013.
We further take the view that the directive of the ROS that the elected members of the CEC refrain from making decisions on behalf of the DAP is likewise without the force of law.
The DAP will as such, seek a judicial pronouncement to this effect.