Public Interest Litigation

A recent ruling in Kuala Lumpur (in 2014), has simplified the test for legal standing (locus standi) in Malaysian public interest litigation cases. The new test developed by the Federal Court means a person will have legal standing to bring a case before the Court if they have at least a genuine interest in an issue of public importance. The new test removes the requirement that the litigant must show he has had his rights affected by the issue before the Court.

In Indian law, public interest litigation means litigation for the protection of the public interest. It is litigation introduced in a court of law, not by the aggrieved party but by the court itself or by any other private party. It is not necessary, for the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction, that the person who is the victim of the violation of his or her right should personally approach the court. Public interest litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism. However, the person filing the petition must prove to the satisfaction of the court that the petition is being filed for a public interest and not just as a frivolous litigation by a busy body. 

The seeds of the concept of public interest litigation were initially sown in India by Krishna Iyer J., in 1976 in Mumbai Kamagar Sabha vs. Abdul Thai.

Public interest litigation or social interest litigation today has great significance and drew the attention of all concerned. The traditional rule of “Locus Standi” that a person, whose right is infringed alone can file a petition, has been considerably relaxed by the Supreme Court in its recent decisions. Now, the court permits public interest litigation at the instance of public spirited citizens for the enforcement of constitutional or legal rights. Now, any public spirited citizen can move/approach the court for the public cause (in the interests of the public or public welfare) by filing a petition:

Therefore, a public minded citizen must be given an opportunity to move the court in the interests of the public.

Note: There are still some solicitors who are unaware that matters have changed since 1988 when Lim Kit Siang's case was thrown out due to him not having Locus Standi. Those interested may read the whole case and the verdict here.