Posts Tagged ‘Judiciary

08
Sep
16

AG, you are a disgrace!

AG, you are a disgrace!

Thinking Malaysians are rightly horrified at seeing the attorney general openly, publicly and happily frolicking with Barisan Nasional ministers.

He comes across as a picture of happiness, singing and dancing in the company of BN politicians.

He has no business to be caught in these incriminating circumstances.

To make matters worse, he has thus far neither denied his larking presence in the video clip nor refuted that he was cavorting and consorting with BN politicians nor challenged the accusation that his behaviour was unbecoming of an attorney general.

To dispel any perceived doubt that he is beholden to BN politicians, he chose to attire himself in BN uniform, regrettably shedding his required impartiality when he exercises his prosecutorial powers.

His conduct is tantamount to a blatant disregard for public opinion. Conduct such as this has destroyed the need for confidence in the fairness of our justice system. He had thus invited justified criticism for sullying his office and besmirching his character through his foolhardiness.

Malaysians who were appalled by his decisions and actions in clearing the prime minister’s involvement in the 1MDB scandal and scuttling the investigation of corruption of the RM2.6bn so-called donation will perhaps have a better understanding of his role after viewing this video clip.

With this evidence that questions his impartiality, Malaysians have every legitimate right to demand his resignation so that respect and confidence can be restored to the hallowed office of the attorney general.

We no longer have any confidence in his judgment and fairness, which have been effectively undermined by his reckless frolicking with the BN politicians.

Decency requires his immediate resignation.

…more
AG, you are a disgrace!
by P Ramakrishnan
5 Sep 2016 – Aliran

07
Jun
12

Black day for Internet users in Malaysia

MAY 29 — The Evidence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 2012 will come into operation in a few days on June 1. The impact of this hastily and stealthily rushed legislation could be devastating.

De facto law minister Nazri Abdul Aziz denies that amendments to the Evidence Act were a means for the government to curb online dissent by making Internet anonymity more difficult to maintain or ignorance to be used as an excuse.

Instead Nazri claims that the law was tightened because “we don’t want [anonymous or pseudonymous] people to slander or threaten others,” according to a report in the Sunday Star.

However opposition leaders such as DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng are unconvinced.

Lim said that the amendments, which were passed during the last sitting of the Dewan Rakyat and the Dewan Negara, “will make it easier for the government to launch selective prosecutions of members of the opposition and civil society”.

According to him, a person is traditionally presumed innocent until proven guilty but the Evidence Act 2012 reverses this truism. Lim illustrates with a personal example: “In other words, I am responsible for anything posted on my website and the burden is on me to prove my innocence, not on the prosecution to prove my guilt.”

Lim also believes that the BN government would practise double standards in exercising the provisions of this legislation.

His misgivings are not entirely without basis, bearing in mind the several occasions when Malaysian authorities have been accused of filtering politically sensitive sites and most recently interfering in the Astro rebroadcast of BBC and Al-Jazeera’s live coverage of the Bersih 3.0 rally.

Nazri’s statement, “Under the amended Act, we shift the burden to the owner of the laptop or account so that we can get to the source [of the slanderous or seditious comments]”, prompted the Malaysian Bar to also express concern with regard to the presumption of guilt contained in the Act.

Internet Society Malaysian Chapter chairman Julian Vincent has pointed out that the amendments could be open to abuse by the investigators.

“In the Internet environment where the websites even of the largest organisations are susceptible to hacking and manipulation, it is dangerous to have this presumption [of guilt] in place.

“The society expresses its hope that the Cabinet will revise the current text and work to address privacy considerations and protect citizens’ rights and civil liberties in any future cyber security legislation,” he said.

Internet users across the board have criticised the amendments as unfair, concurring with the expert views that websites and social networking accounts (Facebook, Myspace, etc) or even e-mail could be easily hacked to post defamatory comments.

…more
Black day for Internet users — CPI
May 29, 2012 – TMI

18
May
12

The death of civil liberties

MAY 16 — Though the government has said much about the repeal of the infamous Internal Security Act, little has been said to explain how its so-called replacement, the Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill (SOA), will impact on our lives.

Even less has been said about the bill tabled to amend the Penal Code that went hand in hand with the SOA. I think there was a reason for this.

To say that the two bills are draconian would be a gross understatement. They brutally curtail the constitutional freedom of Malaysians to dissent. It seems that we have been made the victims of a sleight of hand.

While we were being distracted by the song and dance that attended the termination of the ISA, Parliament was being harnessed to diabolical purpose. The passing of the two bills has sounded the death knell of civil liberties.

I am not given to hyperbole. The facts speak for themselves.

The SOA is more a procedural instrument. It puts in place the legal framework for the investigation and prosecution of what are described as “security offences”. It allows for the kinds of invasive measures that we have come to understand are needed for governments to combat terrorism effectively. Government tells us that terrorism is the raison d’être of the legislation.

The SOA could arguably be justified on this basis, though I question the need for such extreme anti-terrorism legislation in light of our not having been subjected to terrorist attacks or even threats. Curiously, the preamble to the SOA states that action has been taken and further action is threatened by a body of persons both inside and outside Malaysia to cause organised violence against Malaysians, to excite disaffection against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and to procure the alteration though unlawful means of legal institutions in the nation. This is news to me. These are matters of great significance to us; they suggest that we are virtually in a state of war or that we are in the midst of an insurgency.

The truth of the matter is that we have not been made the subject of such scurrilous action and we have not been threatened with such action. The bill recites this so the government can invoke a provision of the Federal Constitution, Article 149, that allows for Parliament to enact laws that contravene certain constitutional guarantees including those that prohibit detention without trial and guarantee a fair trial.

The SOA allows, amongst other things, detention without trial for 28 days and empowers the Attorney-General to take extraordinary measures including the interception of all forms of communication where he has reason to believe a Security Offence (this is explained below) has been committed.

We should not lose sight of the fact that the ISA was enacted under Article 149 to address the guerrilla insurgency we faced in the 1960s. I have been made to understand that the Opposition’s unwillingness to associate with an obvious untruth is one of the main reasons it does not support the bill.

The fact that government has resorted to Article 149 gives credence to suggestions that the ISA has merely been repackaged and that the government is not ready to give up the political advantages that such legislation gives it. As one minister has observed, there were abuses under the ISA and no law is beyond abuse.

…more
The death of civil liberties — Malik Imtiaz Sarwar
May 16, 2012 – TMI

22
Apr
12

Altantuya came to Malaysia to meet Najib, claims her father

PETALING JAYA, April 10 — Murdered Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu came to work in Malaysia to specifically meet Datuk Seri Najib Razak, her father has alleged.

Dr Setev Shaariibuu said today that when he asked his daughter a few years back the purpose of her trip to Malaysia, she said she had to “meet important people.”

“I asked her what was her purpose of travelling to Malaysia. She showed me a picture… taken in Paris. Three people were in it — Abdul Razak Baginda, Najib, and Altantuya.

“She said ‘I have to meet important people’, and pointed to Najib,” he told reporters, through Mongolian interpreter Tsoggerel Och.

Shaariibuu (picture) said he did not know who Najib was when he saw the photograph several years back.

“She told me she had something to decide with Najib. I told her it was not worth it but she went anyway.

“A lot of witnesses have seen this picture,” said a visibly-tired looking Shaariibuu.

The father of the murdered Mongolian woman has offered himself as a witness to the on-going Scorpene submarine sale probe by French authorities, claiming his daughter’s death was linked to the case.

Shaariibuu said today his testimony would be able to “connect the dots” between her death and the Scorpene case, and that he will say “what he knows at the right time.”


…more
Altantuya came to Malaysia to meet Najib, claims her father
April 10, 2012 – TMI

11
Mar
12

The system stinks

The system stinks. For the first time in more than a decade, there are now serious allegations of gross abuse of power against one of the highest officers of the land – the Attorney General – by another high-ranking officer.

Dare the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak get the Cabinet to set up a judicial tribunal to investigate into the serious allegations by the former Commercial Crimes Investigation Department Chief Datuk Ramli Yusuf that the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail had abused his constitutional powers to ensure that there is justice and fair play in the land?

The serious allegations made by Ramli are not new to informed and knowledgeable Malaysians as they have been in the public domain for quite some time, but this is the first time that it has been made specifically by Ramli in public against Gani, which warrants serious and instant attention and action by Najib if the Prime Minister is sincere and serious in wanting to carry out a government and national transformation in the country where abuses of power and corruption are regarded as anathema under his administration.

According to Malaysiakini yesterday, Ramli had made use of his 60th leap year birthday celebration on Wednesday to describe in detail how he and his men had been fixed by the Attorney-General since 2007 and how they were vindicated by the courts in being acquitted of the charges.

He also described how Gani used the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) against him and his men.

Ramli said in his speech that it all began when his officers were entrusted with taking action against a syndicate member who was sent to Jeli, in Kelantan to serve restricted residence (RR) order.

The man had been accused of being involved in organised crime, including loan sharking, running an illegal lottery syndicate, prostitution and drug pushing in Johor.

Ramli said: “This information was given by the then deputy home minister (Johari Baharom), and the matter was considered a ‘top secret’ and highly confidential case. Later, I was told to report to him directly after the file was completed.

“Accordingly, I instructed my officers to put up the case against the syndicate member, which was subsequently submitted to the deputy minister for committal under the RR order. However, upon the advice of the AG, the syndicate member was subsequently released, unconditionally.

“Instead, my officers were charged with taking down false and fabricated statements that implicated the then inspector-general of police (Musa Hassan).

“That’s when AG Gani Patail called the original case file, which was classified as highly confidential, and passed it to the MACC to harass the witnesses.”

Ramli said he was thankful that the people who served under him were acquitted and discharged without their defence being called.

“There was no basis whatsoever for the prosecution to appeal. All of them have been reinstated.

“Tonight, I pay tribute to these fearless officers. All of them have been reinstated and promoted. To IGP Ismail Omar, I say thank you for recognising that they have been victimised and for giving them back their dignity and honour. I am glad that the (police) force has not forsaken them.”

…more
The system stinks – Lim Kit Siang
2 March 2012

16
Feb
12

Judiciary now cowed due to Dr M, says ex-CJ

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 11 — The courts have become subservient to politicians in the executive arm of government today because of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, former Chief Justice Tun Mohd Dzaiddin Abdullah said today.

The retired judge highlighted the amendment to Article 121 of the Federal Constitution, made during Dr Mahathir’s administration in the 1980s, which effectively clipped the judiciary’s wings for over two decades.

“As a result of the amendment, the judicial powers of the courts were removed and they have only such judicial powers as Parliament gives,” Mohd Dzaiddin said, adding that it meant “Parliament is more superior than what the judiciary was.”

The man, who once headed the country’s courts, said the amendment was repugnant “because Parliament attempted to dictate to the judiciary that it only has judicial powers which Parliament itself says the judiciary has.”

He stressed: “This alters in my view in a very fundamental manner the basic structure of the Federal Constitution, from the concept of the independence of the judiciary to dependence of the judiciary on the executive for its judicial powers.”

Malaysia’s judiciary is not a tool to be used by the government for any kind of political expediency, Mohd Dzaiddin said.

“The judiciary should be completely independent both of the executive and the legislature,” the retired judge said in his keynote speech celebrating Tunku Abdul Rahman’s birthday and the Institute of Democracy and Economic Affairs’ (IDEAS) second anniversary at the Tunku Abdul Rahman Memorial today.

In 1988, then Lord President Tun Mohamed Salleh Abas was sacked by then-Prime Minister Dr Mahathir.

Mohd Dzaiddin said the incident was due to clashes in opinions between Dr Mahathir and Salleh over the roles of the two arms of government.

…more
Judiciary now cowed due to Dr M, says ex-CJ
February 11, 2012 – MI

16
Feb
12

Half truths again, Dr M?

Reviled former premier Mahathir Mohamad was accused of resorting to “half-truths”, even deflecting blame onto the King, when he denied the claims made by former chief justice Dzaiddin Abdullah that he was to blame for the slide in justice and integrity in Malaysia’s notorious legal system

The 86-year-old Mahathir called Dzaiddin’s comments “slander”, but he was quick to add that he would sue. Mahathir even suggested that it was the King’s fault in an attempt to deflect blame for a sorry situation that can no longer be denied despite Prime Minister Najib Razak’s claim Malaysia was still the “best” place in the world.

“That’s slander, but I won’t sue them. That whole gang, they make unfounded accusations. There was no such provision. If I had power, I would’ve replaced a lot of people if I could. It was the King who wanted Salleh Abas dropped,” Malaysian Insider reported Mahathir as saying.

Mahathir’s ‘explanation’ was immediately rubbished by opposition leaders, pointing out that the wily leader was again twisting the truths to squirm out of an indefensible spot.

“The King at that time signed on the dotted line so to speak. It was most likely on Mahathir’s recommendation,” PKR MP for Batu Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

“By now, it is clear to all that we don’t have any real legal system. It is whim-and-fancy kangaroo court and while Mahathir is responsible for starting and sustaining such corruption and abuse of power, it is actually Najib who has destroyed whatever reputation the judiciary had left, beginning with the Perak crisis in 2009 which was watched around the world. At this point, Malaysia may be the best place but only for corruption and abuses.”

Half-truths and outright lies

Salleh was sacked as Lord President of the judiciary in 1988 after protesting Mahathir’s attempts to subjugate the judiciary to the executive arm of the government.

Over the weekend, Dzaiddin Abdullah had said the two arms – judiciary and executive – must stay independent of each other. He also said the judiciary became subservient after Mahathir clipped its wings in the 1980s by amending Article 121 of the Constitution.

…more
Half truths again, Dr M? It wasn’t my fault, it was the King who wanted Salleh Abas sacked
13 February 2012 – Malaysia Chronicle




Nuclear lessons for Malaysia (Part 1) (Part 2)
BN govt is directing attention to distant past and distant future, in order to distract people from present misdeeds and poor governance
Felda - A picture is worth a thousand words
How the 1MDB Scandal Spread Across the World (WSJ)
We cannot afford ridiculously expensive RM55 Billion ECRL!
All that is necessary
for the triumph of evil
is for good men
to do nothing.

- Edmund Burke
When the people
fears their government,
there is TYRANNY;
when the government
fears the people,
there is LIBERTY.

- Thomas Jefferson
Do you hear the people sing?

Archives