C4 Centre strongly objects to the MACC’s overreach, and reminds politicians that the guilt of corrupt individuals as proven in a court of law is not a matter to be politicised.
Spot on . DPM Zaid Hamidi ethically should have voluntarily stepped diwn from his position and from politics while his 41 over charges are in proceedings.
This is a little too little a little too late and an article by an incredulous organization a foreign funded so called NGO which has promoted sedition and insurrection based on rumour and innuendo to such an extent it was accepted by a gullible public as fact and acted upon by the judiciary who are not immune from assaults by organizations as C4 is.
The fact of bias, actual, apprehended or the very danger of perceived bias is sufficient to compel a well trained and educated judge to recuse themselves from hearing or presiding over a matter. Thats justice. Thats ethics. Not in Malaysia. And certainly C4 are in no position to judge failures by judges to have acted appropriately in this regard.
The issue of corruption does not arise in this matter against judge Nazlan. The fact he did not recuse himself and whether it constituted judicial misconduct can only be tested by the quality and the substance of the application (if any) made by DS. Najib's lawyers to him to recuse himself. C4 offers nothing in this regard other than their staple of generalizations devoid of substantive reasoning.
One of the faults in the system of justice, courts and the judiciary from the UK is that when such a situation arises, the judge the subject of the recusal application sits as judge, jury and executioner in his own cause. It flies in the face of the very rule of fairness and impartiality that underpins our legal system. This is embodied in the legal maxim " No man should be a judge in his own cause".
The question is this. Why is Judge Nazlan's case before the MACC. C4 and other rag tag organizations are clearly out of their depth in such a situation. Nazlan's case even if there is a conflict of interest situation is not an act of corruption. Corruption even by the very poor and substandard definitions of Malaysia's legislation is so opaque and vague that judge Nazlan's case cannot be decided or handled by the MACC who do not have any constitutional power to try or hear any matter concerning the conduct or misconduct of judges. It is for parliament to do so under their powers to bring judges accused of misconduct before their special committees formed for such a purpose.
If anything at all which smells of corruption that needs to be attend to by parliament, it is the conduct of the Chief Justice of Malaysia who denied the former PM the right to counsel of his choice (the QC) and an extension of time by his new counsel to review his matters. She called it wasting time. There is no such offense as "wasting time". Even a condemned man has the right to be hear before the trap door levers are pulled.
DS Najib's trial was unfair and unlawful. As a minister of the crown, the charges should first have been submitted to parliament who would have decided by a special committee for the purpose whether or not to suspend his indemnities and privileges then refer him to the common courts. That did not happen and that woman draped in her tudong was padded with her abject ignorance of the law.
An absolute display of ignorance by this commentator and those comments similar seems like a conspiracy organised by "The Cash Is King" group. These suckers have nothing better to do.
Lets have some substance to your criticisms. I am all for criticism. Yours is like graffiti on a toilet wall. Elaborate on the points which you consider worthy of criticism. Where is the ignorance?
Has the judiciary done anything to take action against Nazlan’s obvious conflict of interest and has it investigated Nazlan’s alleged corruption? Until this is done, the judiciary will forever b tainted. Just becoz u say that Macc’s investigation is against the convention but that doesn’t mean he is innocent.
Making an ass if the law is a learned rogue's bread and butter game I suppose but It's. time to become more discerning and less punkish.
Spot on . DPM Zaid Hamidi ethically should have voluntarily stepped diwn from his position and from politics while his 41 over charges are in proceedings.
This is a little too little a little too late and an article by an incredulous organization a foreign funded so called NGO which has promoted sedition and insurrection based on rumour and innuendo to such an extent it was accepted by a gullible public as fact and acted upon by the judiciary who are not immune from assaults by organizations as C4 is.
The fact of bias, actual, apprehended or the very danger of perceived bias is sufficient to compel a well trained and educated judge to recuse themselves from hearing or presiding over a matter. Thats justice. Thats ethics. Not in Malaysia. And certainly C4 are in no position to judge failures by judges to have acted appropriately in this regard.
The issue of corruption does not arise in this matter against judge Nazlan. The fact he did not recuse himself and whether it constituted judicial misconduct can only be tested by the quality and the substance of the application (if any) made by DS. Najib's lawyers to him to recuse himself. C4 offers nothing in this regard other than their staple of generalizations devoid of substantive reasoning.
One of the faults in the system of justice, courts and the judiciary from the UK is that when such a situation arises, the judge the subject of the recusal application sits as judge, jury and executioner in his own cause. It flies in the face of the very rule of fairness and impartiality that underpins our legal system. This is embodied in the legal maxim " No man should be a judge in his own cause".
The question is this. Why is Judge Nazlan's case before the MACC. C4 and other rag tag organizations are clearly out of their depth in such a situation. Nazlan's case even if there is a conflict of interest situation is not an act of corruption. Corruption even by the very poor and substandard definitions of Malaysia's legislation is so opaque and vague that judge Nazlan's case cannot be decided or handled by the MACC who do not have any constitutional power to try or hear any matter concerning the conduct or misconduct of judges. It is for parliament to do so under their powers to bring judges accused of misconduct before their special committees formed for such a purpose.
If anything at all which smells of corruption that needs to be attend to by parliament, it is the conduct of the Chief Justice of Malaysia who denied the former PM the right to counsel of his choice (the QC) and an extension of time by his new counsel to review his matters. She called it wasting time. There is no such offense as "wasting time". Even a condemned man has the right to be hear before the trap door levers are pulled.
DS Najib's trial was unfair and unlawful. As a minister of the crown, the charges should first have been submitted to parliament who would have decided by a special committee for the purpose whether or not to suspend his indemnities and privileges then refer him to the common courts. That did not happen and that woman draped in her tudong was padded with her abject ignorance of the law.
An absolute display of ignorance by this commentator and those comments similar seems like a conspiracy organised by "The Cash Is King" group. These suckers have nothing better to do.
Lets have some substance to your criticisms. I am all for criticism. Yours is like graffiti on a toilet wall. Elaborate on the points which you consider worthy of criticism. Where is the ignorance?
Has the judiciary done anything to take action against Nazlan’s obvious conflict of interest and has it investigated Nazlan’s alleged corruption? Until this is done, the judiciary will forever b tainted. Just becoz u say that Macc’s investigation is against the convention but that doesn’t mean he is innocent.
Good work. We cannot be silent and allow fools to run riot over us , in this nation of ours!!!
Excellent Sir. Tqvm.