Posted on

Stop this public lynching

by Dr. Lim Teck Ghee
Friday, 19 July 2013

Commentary

The decision of the AG to charge Alvin Tan and Vivian Lee marks the half-way point in the public lynching of these two young people.

What were they guilty of?

A moment of unthinking madness; an act of stupidity and idiocy; a prank in bad taste; racial and religious insensitivity; youthful arrogance – yes, these criticisms and much more in the way of scorn and public shame and odium can be heaped on their foolish and misguided attempt to draw attention to themselves.

But to charge them for sedition and for a criminal act under the penal code! And then to deny them bail as if they are a major threat to public peace and order. Please!

Let us not forget that prominent politicians guilty of even more in your face racial and religious taunting have got away scot free, with the last notable racist political figure even put up as a candidate during the recent election. And what about even earlier incidents such as kris brandishing? Continue reading “Stop this public lynching”

Posted on

Pakatan’s uphill GE13 battle in the courts

The Malaysian Insider
July 15, 2013

The simple summary of Pakatan Rakyat’s suit in court today is that it did not get a fair election. The question now is, what can and will the courts do?

No matter how you slice or dice it, it is tough for Pakatan to win its suit against the Election Commission (EC) because courts here are loath to disturb anything to do with elections. It is even rare for election courts to overturn polls results.

What more nullifying the whole Election 2013.

Also, Malaysian courts have in recent years not demonstrated a willingness to confront the government of the day on various issues – be it conversions of minors to land matters.

That said, it is remains important for Pakatan to thoroughly detail its cases in which it believed fraud prevented it from winning on May 5, 2013. In dispute are at least 43 seats before the courts.

But what is quite clear is that the EC’s handling of the indelible ink over the past five years would have made the Keystone Kops proud. Never have we seen a commission blunder and make a hash of things the way it has. Continue reading “Pakatan’s uphill GE13 battle in the courts”

Posted on

21st Century Courts, 20th Century Mindset

― Fahri Azzat (Loyarburok.com)
The Malay Mail Online
July 14, 2013

JULY 14 ― You lost your case. The judge decided against you because he found the other side’s witnesses more credible compared to yours and so preferred their testimony to your witnesses’. You complain loudly to any who care to listen, ‘How the hell can the judge prefer their witnesses over mine?’ You angrily tell your lawyer to appeal.

But if your lawyer was honest with you, he will tell you not to bother. Don’t waste your time, money and effort, he should tell you. If you ask why, he will tell you that the appellate court almost always trusts the trial judge’s assessment of a witness’ credibility. They will only depart from it in exceptional cases when the trial judge got it so perversely wrong.

The reason for this was alluded to in the recent Federal Court decision of Isidro Leonardo Quito Cruz v PP [2013] 2 CLJ 1025. It arose when Abdull Hamid Embong FCJ explained why appellate courts did not make finding of facts. He referred to the Privy Council decision of Antonio Dias Caldeira v Frederick Augustus Gray [1936] MLJ 137 (decided on 14 February 1934) which held as follows:

“Now, it settled law that it is no part of the function of an appellate court in a criminal case or indeed any case to make its own findings of fact. That is a function exclusively reserved by the law to the trial court. The reason is obvious. An appellate court is necessarily fettered because it lacks the audio-visual advantage enjoyed by the trial court.” So the appellate court’s reason for not reviewing the credibility of the witnesses during the trial and accepting the trial judge’s opinion on them is because it lacks the audio-visual advantage of the trial court.

Although that may be an acceptable reason in 1936, it is seems incongruous, if not perverse in 2013. After all, audio-visual equipment is now cheap, mobile and ubiquitous. Continue reading “21st Century Courts, 20th Century Mindset”

Posted on

Malaysia’s deep divides

by John Berthelsen
Asia Sentinel
May 29, 2013 10:49AM UTC

National elections on May 5 haven’t cooled political and racial tensions, writes Asia Sentinel’s John Berthelsen

Any hope that May 5 national elections in Malaysia would cool the political atmosphere appears to have been misguided, leaving a country entangled in deepening racial problems and creating the risk of a real threat to the legitimacy of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s reign.

While not calling for Najib’s removal, the prime minister’s most potent critic, former Premier Mahathir Mohamad, damned him with faint praise, telling Bloomberg News in an interview in Tokyo last week that the United Malays National Organization will continue to support him “because of a lack of an alternative.” Continue reading “Malaysia’s deep divides”

Posted on

In defending his seditious speech, Mohd Noor Abdullah has proven he is racist through-and-through and raised question how a closet racist could rise to be Court of Appeal judge

Former Court of Appeal Judge Mohd Noor Abdullah has compounded his crime of sedition when he defended making the most racist and seditious speech in the country in the past 44 years.

On Sunday, in his speech at the forum titled “GE13 post-mortem Muslim leadership and survival” organised by UiTM Malaysia Alumni Association and Gabungan Pelajar Melayu Semanjung in Kuala Lumpur, Mohd Noor warned that the Chinese Malaysians must be prepared for a backlash from the Malay community for their “betrayal” in the recently concluded 13th general election.

He said: “The Chinese betrayal towards the Malay’s hand of friendship – that is true. Because they plotted to seize political power even though they already have economic power”.

Mohd Noor’s racist and seditious speech had been defended on the ground that it was “as a whole constructive and within the boundaries of what is in the federal constitution”, and in line with his expertise as a former judge.

Can Mohd Noor quote chapter and verse as to which article or part of the Malaysian Constitution justified his making irresponsible, fictitious, inflammatory, racist and seditious allegations that the Chinese in Malaysia “plotted to seize political power even though they already have economic power” or his criminal and gangsterish threat of a “Malay backlash” to a completely non-existent “Chinese betrayal towards the Malay’s hand of friendship” ?
Continue reading “In defending his seditious speech, Mohd Noor Abdullah has proven he is racist through-and-through and raised question how a closet racist could rise to be Court of Appeal judge”

Posted on

Najib, Muhyiddin and Mahathir must each apologise for their irresponsible and unMalaysian remarks completely at variance with policies of 1Malaysia and Bangsa Malaysia if there is going to be genuine “national reconciliation” after 13GE

The most sensible, level-headed and statesmanlike statement completely in conformity with the policies of 1Malaysia and Bangsa Malaysia in the past three days since 13GE Polling Day came from former Prime Minister, Tun Abdullah, who demanded a stop to all attempts at racialising Sunday’s polls by blaming a particular community for Barisan Nasional’s poor showing at the ballot boxes.

Abdullah said: “This is unfair and unhelpful”.

Guilty of such “unfair and unhelpful” statements were none other than the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir, who indulged in irresponsible race-baiting and inflammatory incitements totally careless and reckless about the harm they are doing to race relations in the country.

For instance, immediately after the 13GE results were known on Sunday night, Najib talked about a “Chinese tsunami” when it was in fact a “Malaysian tsunami” caused by the political uprising and awakening not only of the Chinese, but all other communities as well, whether Malays, Chinese, Kadazan-Dusun-Murut or Iban communities.

Najib’s “Chinese tsunami” statement was immediately supported by Muhyiddin who said it was “unhealthy in a multi-racial society like Malaysia” to allow one community supporting one side and another race supporting another as it would lead to “tension in inter-racial relations and political instability”.

This is a conclusion based on a total fallacy, for the 13GE has not led to a situation of “one community supporting one side and another race supporting another” as the 13GE was not a battle between the Chinese versus the Malays, but one multi-racial coalition against another i.e. Pakatan Rakyat versus Barisan Nasional. Continue reading “Najib, Muhyiddin and Mahathir must each apologise for their irresponsible and unMalaysian remarks completely at variance with policies of 1Malaysia and Bangsa Malaysia if there is going to be genuine “national reconciliation” after 13GE”

Posted on

Court turns a blind eye to justice

P Ramakrishnan
Immediate past president, now Aliran executive committee member
27 March 2013

Malaysians were rudely shocked to learn that the High Court in Shah Alam put itself in a straitjacket and refused to see the glaring injustice that was clearly highlighted by Klang MP Charles Santiago in a suit that was decided on 14 March 2013.

Mr Santiago wanted the Court to review the principal and supplementary electoral rolls for his parliamentary constituency.

It was very disappointing that Judge Vernon Ong said that the Court was bound by Section 9A of the Elections Act 1958 and cannot review a gazetted electoral roll, literally throwing to the wind the conventional wisdom that “where there is a malady the Court will provide a remedy” – even if it has to use its inherent powers.

The Judge further noted that the Court could not compel the Election Commission (EC) to respond to the queries of the MP as there was no provision in the Act for it to do so. While it may be true that there is no such provision, what is far more important is whether there is specifically any provision in the Act prohibiting the EC from responding?

Why was this logical point entirely overlooked by the Court? If the Court was the bastion of justice as provided by the inherent powers of providing a remedy for a malady, it would have been the natural consequence to fall back on this logic. But surprisingly, this was not the case.

While it may be true that the Court was bound by Section 9A of the Election Act, shouldn’t the Court invoking its overview functions have also looked into the legality of this section?

Is it constitutional? Is it constitutional to perpetuate a wrong in spite of fraud, probably even of a criminal nature, that were clearly established by Mr Santiago? Continue reading “Court turns a blind eye to justice”

Posted on

Is Malaysia pioneering a new-fangled “trial by police reports” in the latest twist of injustice and selective prosecution under Malaysia’s “rule by law”?

The charging of Parti Keadilan Rakyat’s Vice President and MP for Batu, Chua Tian Chang for sedition for allegedly linking Umno to the Sulu-Police shoot-outs in Lahad Datu in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court today is most regrettable and deplorable, for two reasons:

Firstly, it would appear that the Federal Government of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is not prepared to provide the lead and set the example to unite and rally all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion and political affiliation as one patriotic Malaysian people to face up to the challenges posed by the Sulu terrorists to protect unequivocally our national sovereignty and the right to security of the people of Sabah and the security forces.

Is this the reason why the Cabinet in two consecutive meetings yesterday and the previous Wednesday refused to act on the proposal for the convening of a special session of Parliament on a six-point proposal (1) to give full support to the security forces to take all necessary measures to protect the national sovereignty and security; (2) pay tribute and honour to the nine fallen heroes from the police and armed forces in the shoot-outs in Lahad Datu and Semporna; (3) set up a special foundation to look after the welfare of the families of the fallen heroes and ensure the life-long education up to university level for their children at government expense; (4) condemn the atrocities committed against the fallen heroes by Sulu terrorists; (5) urge the immediate halt of the annual “cession payment” of RM5,300 to the self-proclaimed heir of Sulu Sultanate and (6) to call on the Philippines Government to drop all claims to Sabah.

Secondly, the prosecution of Tian Chua is setting a most dangerous precedent for the grave and gross miscarriage of justice in present-day Malaysia for at least two reasons: Continue reading “Is Malaysia pioneering a new-fangled “trial by police reports” in the latest twist of injustice and selective prosecution under Malaysia’s “rule by law”?”

Posted on

Charges against Bersih supporters thrown out

By Hafiz Yatim | 11:45AM Sep 18, 2012
Malaysiakini

Twenty-one people, including federal and state lawmakers, were acquitted and discharged by a sessions court today for illegal assembly and not abiding by a police officer’s order.

The prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against the accused and police failed to show the roles played by the participants in the candlelight vigil in support of Bersih in 2008, the court in Petaling Jaya ruled.

“There is a gap in the prosecution’s case following the inconsistent testimony of the witnesses (from the police).

“The witnesses were inconsistent in stating the time for the crowd to disperse as some were saying 9.45pm and others 10pm and 11pm. This affects to their credibility and also the credibility of the order isued by the police to disperse.
Continue reading “Charges against Bersih supporters thrown out”

Posted on

Lawyers instructed to institute legal proceedings against defamation against me in Tanda Putera’s official Facebook page

The accusation by Aida Fitra Buyong, the executive producer of the movie, Tanda Putera, that I was being “defensive” over the publication of my photograph on the May 13 film’s official Facebook page alleging that I had urinated at the flagpole bearing the Selangor flag at the then Selangor Mentri Besar’s residence, provoking May 13, 1969 riots, is most scandalous, outrageous and offensive.

Do the creators of the May 13 film expect me to keep silent while they concoct lies about the May 13, 1969 riots, like the total fiction about my urination at the then Selangor Mentri Besar’s residence provoking May 13, 1969 riots when I was never in Kuala Lumpur on May 11, 12 and 13, 1969?

Would the film’s creators, including director Datin Paduka Shuhaimi and executive producer accept lies and falsehoods told about them without attempting to defend their own dignity and integrity?

Aida’s accusation has in fact debunked the claim by Tanda Putera’s director Datin Paduka Shuhaimi Baba that the May 13 riot scene, which lasts about 10 minutes of the 115-minute film, was historically accurate.
Continue reading “Lawyers instructed to institute legal proceedings against defamation against me in Tanda Putera’s official Facebook page”

Posted on

Section 114A and legal presumptions: Are they fair?

By Art Harun | August 15, 2012
The Malaysian Insider

AUG 15 ― Many may not realize this but the law does make many presumptions about the subject matter of its governance, namely, us.

The most famous (infamous?) and perhaps harshest presumption that our law makes is in respect of drug trafficking. Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 stipulates that whoever is found guilty of drug trafficking shall be punished by death.

Making things a lot easy for the prosecution is a legal presumption imposed by Section 37 of that Act that any person who is found in possession of, among others, 15g or more of heroin or morphine or 200g or more of cannabis will be presumed to be a drug trafficker unless proven otherwise.

Without that legal presumption, the prosecution would, regardless of the quantity of the drug being in possession of the accused person, have to prove that he or she is a trafficker. That means, the prosecution would have to prove that the accused person has been doing any of the following acts, namely, “manufacturing, importing, exporting, keeping, concealing, buying, selling, giving, receiving, storing, administering, transporting, carrying, sending, delivering, procuring, supplying or distributing any dangerous drug otherwise than under the authority of the Act.”
Continue reading “Section 114A and legal presumptions: Are they fair?”

Posted on

Charging Rafizi – gross miscarriage of justice

By Dr Chen Man Hin, DAP Life advisor

I feel there is a gross miscarriage of justice by charging Rafizi for revealing bank accounts of NFCorp.

In my opinion, Rafizi by revealing the bank accounts of NFCorp has shown that the officers of NFCorp were involved in a major offence of laundering money belonging to the people.

NFCorp obtained a sum of RM250 million from the government, ostensibly to invest in a major cattle venture.

The company officers led by its chairman Datuk Seri Mohamed Salleh misused the money and attempted to hide the money in properties in foreign countries. They were engaged in money laundering.

Rafizi discovered this and reported the money laundering operation to the press, based on bank accounts in the names of NFCorp officers.
Continue reading “Charging Rafizi – gross miscarriage of justice”

Posted on

Teoh’s death: A-G’s ‘afraid’ to prosecute

by Teoh El Sen
Free Malaysia Today
April 7, 2012

Former KL CID chief Mat Zain Ibrahim claims the A-G is looking after his own interest in deciding not to charge anyone over Teoh Beng Hock’s death.

PETALING JAYA: With the amount of skeletons in his closet, Attorney-General Abdul Ghani Patail would be “digging his own grave” if he prosecutes anyone over the Teoh Beng Hock’s death, said a retired senior policeman today.

Ex- Kuala Lumpur criminal investigation department(CID) chief Mat Zain Ibrahim said this was the reason why Ghani was being cowardly and ‘afraid’ to institute criminal proceedings against any persons recommended by the royal commission of inquiries (RCIs).

“It’s for his own survival. Ghani will not institute any criminal proceeding against any person or persons that are being recommended by any RCIs.

“It is not about lack of evidence or that the case needs further investigation from the appropriate Department or anything to that effect. The RCIs recommendations are valid and proper.

“I state without any hesitation, that Ghani is himself very afraid to take any actions.

“To institute any criminal proceeding against those persons would be like digging his own grave.

“It is like putting himself in the same boat with those people he is suppose to charge and prosecute.

The only difference would be those people may have only one charge hanging over their heads,while Gani Patail has several times more,” said Mat Zain in an e-mail to FMT today. Continue reading “Teoh’s death: A-G’s ‘afraid’ to prosecute”

Posted on

Not sub judice to discuss NFC in Parliament, court ruling shows

By Clara Chooi
The Malaysian Insider
Mar 14, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, March 15 — The Dewan Rakyat Speaker’s reliance on the rule of sub judice to shut down discussion of the National Feedlot Centre (NFC) scandal in Parliament is flawed, a recent court decision shows.

The High Court, in a contempt suit filed by Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Sdn Bhd (SYABAS) against a Selangor government lawyer and PAS organ Harakah last year, had held that the courts must be cautious in applying the sub judice law and must also take into consideration constitutional provisions on the freedom of speech.

According to the judgment sighted by The Malaysian Insider today, Justice Ariff Yusof, when rejecting the application, had stressed that the common law rule on sub judice must be moulded “in the light of fundamental liberties provisions”.

“The court cannot believe the sensitivities of the average Malaysian can be so different so as to incline the court to adopt a completely different juristic approach which relegates freedom of expression below the sub judice rule,” he had said. Continue reading “Not sub judice to discuss NFC in Parliament, court ruling shows”

Posted on

Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria should intervene against the harsh and excessive one-year jail sentence imposed on imam Hoslan Hussein for throwing his shoes at the Federal Court judges

For the past few days, Malaysian sense of decency and propriety had been pulverised by a battery of blows which collectively signal that something is very rotten with the Najib administration which is marking its third anniversary next month, viz:

  • the one-year jail sentence by the Federal Court for contempt of court by imam Hoslan Hussein who flung his shoes at the three-man bench led by Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Zulkifli Ahmad Makinuddin on February 22;

  • Two years for the High Court judge to produce a 70-page judgment on the murder trial of Altantuya Shaariibuu, who was blown to bits with C4 explosives, which was totally unconcerned about the motive of the murder.

  • The denial of welfare aid and farming subsidies to disabled Sarawak farmer Frusis Lebi, 51, by Sarawak agriculture assistant minister Mong Dagang for supporting the opposition.

  • The unending revelations of the horrors of the RM250 million National Feedlot Centre “cow condo” scandal reaching far beyond the shores of Malaysia, with the latest allegations of purchase of properties not only in Singapore but also in Kazakhstan involving public funds specifically meant to promote greater beef self-sufficiency in the country. Continue reading “Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria should intervene against the harsh and excessive one-year jail sentence imposed on imam Hoslan Hussein for throwing his shoes at the Federal Court judges”

Posted on

A year for a shoe

By Justice Seeker | March 08, 2012
The Malaysian Insider

MARCH 8 — The Federal Court may have been justified in throwing the book and jailing imam Hoslan Husin, had they done so on the day of the offence.

Because what he did, by tossing his shoes at them, was contempt in the face of the court and the offended quorum of judges would have been within their rights to hear the case there and then.

But the judges and the judiciary did not want the humiliation to go any further (that is why mainstream newspapers were asked by the Palace of Justice not to report the incident), so they allowed Hoslan to leave court.

The problem was that there is such a thing as online media and the case was reported widely. With the news now in the public domain, the powers that be had to swing into action.
Continue reading “A year for a shoe”

Posted on

Judiciary still in winter of emasculation

— by Bob Teoh
The Malaysian Insider
Jan 12, 2012

JAN 12 — Let’s not be beguiled by Prime Minister Najib Razak’s claim of the judiciary’s independence following the High Court’s full acquittal and discharge of Anwar Ibrahim from the charge of sodomy. As succinctly put by an international civil liberties watchdog, the Opposition leader should not have been charged in the first place.

Anwar’s three trials over 20 years were simply an abuse of due process; nothing more than Umno’s dirty and sordid politics to rid itself of its arch nemesis involving all three prime ministers in a row.

Don’t be misled, a swallow doth not a summer maketh. We are still deep in the winter of an emasculated judiciary frozen since the Mahathir ice age. We need more evidence of courage and boldness from our judges before we can hope to thaw into a new spring.

But credit must be given to where it’s due. Recent judgments indicate some judges are willing to go into early retirement or be put into the cold storage by going the extra mile in their adjudication. The High Court’s judgment against the government in the Allah case is a case in point. There are a few others that are noteworthy. Continue reading “Judiciary still in winter of emasculation”

Posted on

Hold The Accolades!

by M. Bakri Musa

Now that Judge Mohamad Zabidin Diah has acquitted Anwar Ibrahim on his “Sodomy II” charge, there is no end of praise heaped upon the judge specifically and the system of justice generally. Prime Minister Najib was quick with his smug assertion that “neither politics nor politicians have any influence over the dispensation of justice.” Foreign governments too have been effusive with their praises. Some now brazenly call for Anwar Ibrahim to apologize for his earlier criticisms of the system.

Hold the accolades! This sordid trial reveals everything that is rotten with the Malaysian system of justice. This case should never have been prosecuted in the first place. That it was reflected the level or more precisely lack of professionalism on the part of these career prosecutors. As for the trial, there were many instances where the judge could have thrown the case out, as when the physical evidence was introduced. Now the learned judge used that as the reason for acquittal. Continue reading “Hold The Accolades!”

Posted on

Anwar verdict resets Malaysian politics

By Simon Roughneen
Asia Times

KUALA LUMPUR – A not-guilty verdict in a sex scandal case against Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim could prove a game-changer in the run-up to elections due by 2013 but thought by many analysts to be held this year.

After months of railing against what he deemed trumped-up and politicized charges, Anwar cut an understandably cheerful and relieved dash on Monday morning when speaking to perhaps 3,000 supporters outside the Kuala Lumpur court where he was acquitted of charges of sodomizing a male party aide in 2008. Sodomy is a criminal offense punishable by 20 years in prison in Malaysia, where Muslim citizens are subject to sharia law. Continue reading “Anwar verdict resets Malaysian politics”

Posted on

Malaysia’s Moment of Sanity

By Bridget Welsh
The Wall Street Journal

Yesterday’s acquittal of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on the charge of sodomy ends two and a half years of a bad sequel. After being convicted once in 2000 on the same charge and subsequently exonerated on appeal, this time the court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case.

The decision is a moment of sanity after three years of political turmoil since the March 2008 polls. That election effectively broke the stranglehold on power of the incumbent Barisan Nasional, the National Front coalition, which lost its two-thirds majority in parliament. After the loss, the ruling United Malays National Organization seemed to go back to its mode of personal-attack politics, as practiced by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. The new accusation against Mr. Anwar also signaled a return to the ways of the Mahathir era. Continue reading “Malaysia’s Moment of Sanity”