Ketua Pentadbir Parlimen Malaysia & Ors v Datuk Haji Idris Bin Haji Buang & Anor

Appellant(s):

• Ketua Pentadbir Parlimen Malaysia
• Ketua Pengarah Perkhidmatan Awam, Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia
• Kerajaan Malaysia

Respondent(s):

• Datuk Haji Idris Bin Haji Buang
• Datuk Seri Kamarudin Bin Ambok

• YAA Tan Sri Hasnah binti Dato' Mohammed Hashim
• YA Dato' Zabariah Binti Mohd Yusof
• YA Datuk Abdul Karim Bin Abdul Jalil

• The respondents, former Members of Parliament, initiated an originating summons seeking a declaration that their pensions should be recomputed and revised in accordance with salary increases for serving Members of Parliament under the Members of Parliament (Remuneration) (Amendment) Act 2015.
• The 2015 Amendment Act, while gazetted in July 2015, was given retrospective effect from January 2015, which altered the mechanism for pension adjustment for former Members of Parliament.
• The High Court dismissed the respondents' claim, but the Court of Appeal allowed their appeal, holding that the 2015 Order could not retrospectively modify their pre-existing pension rights.

• Whether amendments to the Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967 (Act 388) via Act A996 dispensed with the need for an express power in the Parent Act for subsidiary legislation to operate retrospectively, thereby affecting the binding nature of *Kerajaan Malaysia v. Wong Pot Heng & Anor*.
• Whether the former Members of Parliament's entitlement to pension adjustment based on revised salaries was an accrued or acquired right protected by Section 30(1)(b) of Act 388, or merely a contingent/inchoate right susceptible to retrospective modification.
• Whether the amendments to the Members of Parliament (Remuneration) Act 1980 were unconstitutional, particularly regarding the application of Articles 132 and 147 of the Federal Constitution to former Members of Parliament.

• The Court allowed the appeal, holding that Act A996 significantly altered the scope and character of Act 388, empowering delegated authorities to legislate retrospectively even without express provision in the Parent Act, thus rendering *Wong Pot Heng* no longer binding.
• The Court determined that the former Members of Parliament's right to pension adjustment based on salary revisions was a contingent or inchoate right, not an accrued or acquired right, and therefore not protected by Section 30(1)(b) of Act 388 from retrospective modification.
• The Court affirmed that former Members of Parliament are not members of the public services under Article 132(3) of the Federal Constitution, hence the pension protection under Article 147(1) (the "not less favourable" test) does not apply to them.