Advocates for the referral of Na'imah's legal questions to the Federal Court argue that it is essential for clarifying the constitutional implications of the MACC Act 2009. By addressing whether Sections 30(5) and 36(2) infringe upon fundamental rights, the Federal Court can provide authoritative guidance on the balance between anti-corruption measures and individual constitutional protections.
Such a referral is seen as a necessary step to ensure that the application of the MACC Act aligns with constitutional principles, thereby upholding the rule of law and protecting individual rights. Legal experts believe that this approach will promote transparency and fairness in the enforcement of anti-corruption laws.
Furthermore, proponents suggest that resolving these legal questions at the highest judicial level will prevent prolonged legal uncertainties and provide clear directives for future cases involving similar issues.