Tag: law

Categories
Environment

[2504] Wrongly freed, wrongly judged

This has to be a case of taking a dim view of justice, where the judgment is too stuck in technicality. The notorious Anson Wong was freed by the Appeal Court. The judges reasoned that the earlier harsh judgment of 5 years worth of imprisonment did not take into account Wong’s guilty plead, the fact that this was Wong’s first offense and the previous judges took into account irrelevant material.

Consider this. Back in 2000, Wong was arrested in the US and sentenced to 71 months of imprisonment for wildlife smuggling. So, first offense Mr. Judge? Really? Yes, first offense in Malaysia but definitely not the first offense if the judge had taken a wider view. Wong is really an unrepentant smuggler. Did the appeal judges take that into account?

As for the guilty plead, the incentive system is perverse. If you know the evidence are mounting against you, and you know that a guilty plead would lessen your sentence, what would be the best course of action? It does not take an economist specializing in game theory to answer that. I am sure Anson Wong knows this. Back in the US, he pleaded guilty exactly because he knew was in it for. Back in 2010 in Malaysia, he knew he was in it for Malaysia. Yet, the appeal judges decided that a 5-year jail sentence is excessive.

Finally, the appeal judges said the earlier harsh judgment took into account irrelevant evidence and sentiment. Did the appeal judges take into account the pillar that Wong is to the illegal wildlife trade industry? His notoriety? His suspicious good ties with wildlife authority in Malaysia?

Why did not the judges take that into account?

This is the Malaysian legal system. It is an outrageous system.

Categories
Liberty

[1960] Of Judge Brandeis in 1927

In Malaysia, the slightest possibility of unrest due to free speech is taken by those in power as a ticket to suppress individual rights.

In California in 1927, that rationale was rejected by Judge Brandeis of the United States Supreme Court:

But it is hardly conceivable that this court would hold constitutional a stature which punished as a felony the mere voluntary assembly with a society formed to teach that pedestrians had the moral rights to cross uninclosed, unposted, wastelands and to advocate their doing so, even if there was imminent danger that advocacy would lead to trespass. The fact that speech is likely to result in some violence or in destruction of property is not enough to justify its suppression. There must be the probability of serious injury to the State. Among free men, the deterrents ordinarily to be applied to prevent crime are education and punishment for violations of the law, not abridgement of the rights of speech and assembly. [Whitney v. California. Louis Brandeis. 1927]

Categories
Activism Politics & government Society

[1390] Of Nurin to Chief Justice: A Collapse of Law and Order? by IKD

So okay. Right after I had my first real outing my new best friend, the Nikon D40, I gave an Institute for Policy Research-organized (Institut Kajian Dasar; IKD) forum a visit. I do not think I would like to write too much about it since one of the panels talked about what I wanted to blog in the first place; I am a little bit disheartened when somebody made the point public first. Anyway, he mentioned how trust is important and to some extent, the impact of lack of public trust to state institution. It is a little bit blurry whom spoke of that — it could only be either Mr. Cumaraswamy or Tunku Abdul Aziz — but that point is the most important lesson for many to take note from the big picture-kind of thinking.

On general however, the forum was about how, allegedly, rotten the judiciary is. From there on, the panel tried to convince the audience on why a royal commission is required to not just investigate the authenticity of the scandalous video made public earlier by PKR but the state of the judiciary as a whole. The sentiment of the panel was that it has been a downhill for judiciary independence in the spirit of separation of powers since 1988, the year when former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad orchestrated the removal Salleh Abbas from the office of the Lord President of the Supreme Court.

About the video itself, the footage released to the public is just first part of the video. According to Mr. Sivarasa Rasiah and Mr. Anwar Ibrahim, there is another approximately 6 minutes of unreleased clip. In unreleased clip according to Anwar Ibrahim further, Judge Ahmad Fairuz’s name can be clearly heard and more names were mentioned.

That asides, some of the usual suspects were there. By suspects, I meant bloggers! I think, if one attends too many public forums, sooner or later, the most of the faces would be recognizable.

Finally, pictures:

Some rights reserved. By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams

The banner.

Some rights reserved. By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams

I apologize for the quality of the photo: I am still exploring the features of Nikon D40 but from the left, Tunku Abdul Aziz of Transparency International, Mr. Param Cumaraswamy formerly of the United Nations, the chairperson Mr. Sivarasa Rasiah, former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and Secretary to the Bar Council Lim Chee Wee.

Some rights reserved. By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams

And that is Din Merican.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — Howsy has more.

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1381] Mengenai Utusan yang nakal

Utusan hari ini menyentuh tentang rakaman video yang didedahkan oleh Parti Keadilan Rakyat beberapa hari lalu. Di dalam laporan itu:

PUTRAJAYA 21 Sept. — Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi berkata, polis perlu menyiasat segera dakwaan kewujudan klip video yang menunjukkan seorang peguam kanan sedang bercakap dengan seseorang berhubung pelantikan hakim-hakim di negara ini. [Klip video: PM arah siasat. Utusan Malaysia. September 22 2007]

Perhatian harus diberikan kepada frasa ini: dakwaan kewujudan klip video. Adakah Utusan Malaysia sedang cuba memberi gambaran bahawa klip tersebut tidak wujud?

Tambahan lagi, Perdana Menteri yang dikasihi berkata:

Beliau berkata, langkah itu penting bagi menentukan sama ada klip video berkenaan boleh dipercayai atau tidak.

“Klip video dan transkripnya telah dihantar ke pejabat saya. Soalnya, adakah ia betul dan boleh dipercayai?

“Ini yang penting kerana video itu menunjukkan seorang peguam bercakap seorang diri sahaja. Lagi seorang kita tidak tahu siapa yang bercakap,” kata Abdullah pada sidang akhbar selepas mempengerusikan mesyuarat Suruhanjaya Polis ke-71 di sini hari ini. [Klip video: PM arah siasat. Utusan Malaysia. September 22 2007]

Adakah PM percaya yang peguam itu bercakap seorang diri sahaja?

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1376] Of throw away common law, says a corrupted judge

Not too long ago, Chief Justice of Malaysia, Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim suggests that it is time for Malaysia to stop making reference to the English Common Law and develop its own common law. Later, the same individual is caught red-handed commitiing corruption of the highest order.

Transcript is available here.

Previously, religious conservatives jumped on the proposal, supporting the Chief Justice. Little did they know that they walked hand in hand with a devil. Now, go and defend your hero.

This guilt of association, despite fallacious, is highly satisfying.

But there may be one thing that goes farther than fallacy. Recall that the same Chief Justice, or more fittingly, Chief Injustice, was one of two judges that voted against Lina Joy, much to the joy of local religious conservatives. It would be interesting to see if that case was fixed too, in the name of religion. Back in April 2007, Minister Nazri Abdul Aziz suggested that popularity is more important than justice….