“TRULY, GOD DOES NOT CHANGE THE CONDITION OF A PEOPLE UNTIL THEY CHANGE WHAT IS IN THEMSELVES.”YOU CAN’T BANNED THE PEOPLE’S VOTE LET’S MARCH TO KEEP ALIVE DEMOCRACY
Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar YOU CAN’T BANNED THE PEOPLE’S VOTE LET’S MARCH TO KEEP ALIVE DEMOCRACY KEEP ALIVE IN MALAYSIA.IT IS PEOPLE AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
“Truly, God does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves.” (13:11).
Dato’ Seri Shafee Abdullah framed that.. Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial the defence raised discrepancies over the charges framed and accuser …in sodomy 1 ? And what do you … Read moreSHAFEE FRAMED AND FABRICATED THE SODOMY1AND 2 NOW WANTS BE SODOMISED A LIABILITY TO NAJIB
CAN MALAYSIA DEPEND ON US? Tan Sri Eric Chia, the former managing director of Perwaja Steel, was acquitted after 43 days of trial without his defence being called.In acquitting the accused, the presiding High Court judge heavily criticised the conduct of the prosecution, especially their failure to call several key witnesses who had obvious knowledge of the material elements of the case.With reference to particular key witnesses from Japan, the judge questioned whether it was the Japanese witnesses who were “reluctant” to come or “the prosecution was the one reluctant to bring them here”.
The prosecution of Koh Kim Teck, a businessman, and his two bodyguards, who were charged with murdering 14-year-old Chinese national Xu Jian Huang, and who were acquitted in 2005, is another case in point.
After a trial lasting 36 days and with 39 prosecution witnesses having given evidence, the presiding judge found that the prosecution had not brought forward any evidence which could implicate the accused in the murder and that there had been no “prima facie” case made out to warrant the defence being called to answer the charge.
The prosecution had apparently omitted to call material witnesses, including the investigating officer for the case and Koh’s driver who had reportedly given a cautioned statement that he had seen both bodyguards throw Xu into the swimming pool where he was eventually found. Two other material witnesses who were present in the house were also not called.
Yet another was the prosecution for the murder of Noritta Samsudin, where the accused was acquitted after 29 days of trial. The prosecution appealed against the acquittal right up to the Federal Court.
In dismissing the appeal, the Federal Court noted that there was a gaping hole in the prosecution’s case, where it failed to sufficiently account for the likelihood of there being another person present at Noritta Samsudin’s condominium unit who could also have committed the crime. No one else has been charged for the murder.
Any discussion on expensive and long-running criminal trials would not be complete without reference to the Irene Fernandez trial which spanned seven years and took over 300 days to complete.
It is still not over for the Tenaganita director, who was convicted in 2003 of publishing false news about the ill-treatment of detainees in camps for illegal immigrants. Her appeal against this conviction to the High Court has been the subject of numerous delays and has yet to be heard.
The solution is to separate the offices of the AG and the PP
The scope of the Attorney-General’s powers in Malaysia has long been a subject of debate and controversy. He is the chief legal adviser to the government and is responsible for advising ministers involved in legal proceedings in their official capacity.
But as public prosecutor, he is also entrusted with power, which he uses at his discretion, to start, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court or a court-martial.
His dual role has posed a real problem. A conflict of interest is bound to arise if he has to institute criminal proceedings against members of the government.
The three-judge Supreme Court committee probing the law graduate’s sexual harassment complaint against retired Supreme Court judge AK Ganguly has said that there was prima facie evidence of unwelcome sexual conduct on the part of retired judge.
However, Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam has closed further proceedings on the sexual harassment allegation saying it could do little against a retired judge administratively.
The CJI has sent a copy of the fact-finding committee report to the law graduate and Justice Ganguly indicating that the aggrieved party could take desired steps.
The law intern had first alleged sexual harassment on November 6, in a blog for Journal of Indian Law and Society. Subsequently she repeated the allegation in an interview to Legally India website.
On December 2, BJP leader and leader of opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj demanded the resignation of Justice Ganguly as chairman of West Bengal human rights commission, saying “not only Caesar’s wife but Caesar too must be above suspicion”.
She wrote on Twitter: “I strongly feel that Justice A.K.Ganguli should resign as Chairman of WB Human Rights Commission,” adding, “Not only Caesar’s wife but Caesar too must be above suspicion.”
The Trinamool Congress too demanded the resignation of Justice Ganguly from the West Bengal human rights commission.
Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Bandopadhyay on November 29 said, “This is the first time such an allegation has been made against a former Supreme Court judge who is at present holding the post of WBHRC chairman. He should resign immediately.”
But at the same time, Justice Ganguly received support like from eminent lawyer Soli Sorabjee and former Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir amid calls for him to step down as chairman of West Bengal human rights commission.
Justice Ganguly had denied the allegations against him.
The law ministry is processing papers for a presidential reference for the removal of West Bengal human rights commission chairman Justice AK Ganguly under the Human Rights Act.
Justice Ganguly has been accused of sexually harassing a law intern who worked under him a year ago. The law ministry is likely to inform the President that a formal inquiry can be constituted against the former Supreme Court judge.
The President can remove Justice Ganguly from the post of WBHRC chairman only after making a reference to the Supreme Court for holding an inquiry in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the court.
As per section 23 (1A) of the Human Rights Act, “The chairperson or any member of the state commission shall only be removed from his office by order of the President on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the SC, on a reference being made to it by the President, has, on inquiry held in accordance with the procedure prescribed in that behalf by the SC, reported that the chairperson or such member as the case may be, ought on any such ground to be removed.”
Sources said the government will communicate to the President that in Justice Ganguly’s case, there appears to be a case of “proved misbehaviour” — a ground for removal under the Human Rights Act. The Act also states that “moral turpitude” can be a ground for removal of a human rights commission member or chairperson.
Although an in-house inquiry by three Supreme Court judges had indicted Justice Ganguly of “unwelcome behaviour of a sexual nature”, its conclusions were informal and no case has been registered against the retired judge. In this case, the apex court can take cognizance of the panel’s report.
Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and Muhammad Shafee Abdullah will finally have to resigned, the operative word being ‘finally’. It has taken the government a lot to reach this point, and the final call was taken apparently because of Rosmah’s push. On the face of it, the decision to make Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and Muhammad Shafee … Read moreWHY NAJIB YOUR CRUDE SILENT ON ABDUL GANI PATAIL AND MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH
