So, TIME is an Essence for Justice!

With so many cases being dragged for years in many courts, this essential elements had already gone for those cases. So, justice had been miscarriage in many courts and it cannot be done by the Judge alone if those solicitors had not alert the judge accordingly or vice versa. So, abuse of justice exists not only by a single Judge but a common phenomenon in many courts with contribution from the Judges and the solicitors. Otherwise, how can a simple suit under case management be without even the first Suggested Statement of Fact and Issues from the Plaintiff after more than two years?

The STRAIGHTEN UP is not only on the Judge but on the overall Legal system!!

His resignation would be a plus for the Malaysian judiciary.

I bet he can even remember the date of birth and all the names of his goats.

August 29, 2007 20:25 PM

Abdul Hamid Is Court Of Appeal President, Alauddin, Chief Judge Of Malaya :

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 29 (Bernama) — Federal Court judges Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad and Datuk Alauddin Mohd Sheriff have been appointed Court of Appeal President and Chief Judge of Malaya respectively.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, in making the announcement Wednesday, said that the appointments would take effect at a date to be fixed after consultation between the Federal Court and Istana Negara.

The appointments had received the consent of Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin on the advice of the prime minister after consulting the Conference of Rulers.

The post of Court of Appeal President fell vacant following the death of Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad of brain tumour on May 31.

Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim had been acting Chief Judge of Malaya since the retirement of Tan Sri Siti Norma Yaakob on Jan 5.

Abdullah said in a statement that the appointments were made under Clause (1) of Article 122B of the Federal Constitution.

– MORE

But who will take over the Chief Justice position when Fairuz retires?

And all because of the lazy, lackadaisical, tak apa attitude of the judge.

The pertinent question is how long since High Court tenure till now in Federal Court to write judgments?

Obviously 5 months is different from (say) 5 years. A 5-year delay, for example, raises serious questions as to whether the judge could remember all the details of a case accurately after such a long time to now write it in the manner satisfactory to the service of justice.

There is yet another question relating to the real reason for the delay: what if, other than backlog, the reason for the delay is that the judge, though finding ease in just pronouncing (orally) a verdict of liable/guilty or not liable/guilty at the conclusion of hearing is not of the type who can sit down and articulate and write his rationale and thoughts on facts and law to explain why he decided the way he did.

If one pushes him to do now – to clear the backlog – isn’t he not going to just write something, no matter how poor in reasoning or lacking in grasp of law just to relieve the pressure from political or public demand? What is the use of a judgment that has no quality but just out of expedience to diffuse public controversy? Will the ends of justice be served?

Might as well he does not write it, but then again, if he does not do so, how could any other judge, who has not had the benefit of hearing the case first hand, write on his behalf?

Should there be a re-trial of the 35 cases before any other judge because any other alternative seem an effrontery to justice?

Former attorney-general and current Human Rights Commission chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman said that even former lord president Tun Hamid Omar had said any delay, if found to be unreasonable, could lead to the judge’s removal under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution.

So the other question invariably arises is whether, based on the principle of the buck ends at the head, should the head of judiciary then be now made vicariously responsible to answer for the misfeasance and lache of his subordinate judge who has been guilty of misconduct in the sense of not giving written judgments for so long? :)

This PM is a complete and total washout.

so don’t blame him he’s very busy

Falling in love again is not part of it.

“Datuk Seri Abdullah said: ‘They seek to paint a dark and bleak picture of Malaysia. A Malaysia that is supposedly inefficient and lacking in integrity. A Malaysia that is supposedly torn at the seams. A Malaysia that is increasingly disunited and in decline.’ ”

From his point of view, everyone else is wrong. Everything is going great. That is, until the shit has to hit him straight in the face before he wakes up.

In the STAR today it was reported:

“Abdullah, who is Umno president, said he had already informed the Chief Justice that he wanted an explanation. ”

Even though for once he is doing something right, albeit slowly, can AAB(the Executive) “order” the Judiciary to give him an explanation? I thought the Judiciary is independent from the Executive? Even conceding that the CJ is duty bound to give an explanation in tghis case to protect the integrity of the Judiciary in the face of such serious allegations of judiciary incompetence and travesty of justice, shouldn’t Pak Lah just “advice” the CJ to explain since he has no authority to “order” th Judiciary?

In the light of this, I wonder how many other cases he (and the Executive) has “ordered” the CJ to do their bidding. And what would happen if there is a case where the PM or the Executive has to be tried before the CJ? Would the CJ be ordered around by the Executive on how the trial is to be conducted?