“parliamary”??

Would it be open to the media and televised?

“He said the commission….. would ensure that there would be an effective check and balance.” BERNAMA

Does this mean those under investigation would now need to balance their check books?

“Ex-gratia payment for “the pain and loss” suffered by …”

I strongly suggest the aggrieved parties commence a wrongful dismissal suit against the BN government based on whatever admission made so far – and I think the public admission made so far is enough to form the basis for such a law suit.

General and special damages and punitive damages along with loss of earnings would easily bring the quantum of damages to millions and in double digits too. This figure could well be higher if the services of a QC like Jeffery is sought.

“I am glad that 24 hours after my comment, the Prime Minister has committed himself to a policy position on an independent anti-corruption agency.” KIT

YB Kit,

Respectfully, now is not the time to step back and enjoy the scenery, breathe the fresh air and smell the coffee – though no one can dispute that you have worked hard to plough the land and sow the seeds. It will be premature until you see the fruits of the harvest – and that is still a long way off.

What has become of Lingamgate? Will he be allowed to korek, korek, korek and spoil your harvest?

Imagine having Tun M on the witness stand and under oath!!!

On the issue of judicial reforms, I’m curious why the issue of the return to the jury system has never been raised.

Let the judge give the instructions on the law to the jury, and let the jury be the trier of the facts of the case rather than the judge be the trier of both law and facts.

We should have a full jury system and one that is not limited to just capital crimes.

The reasons for doing away with jury trials are no more valid today. Those days it is difficult to find people who are educated up to high school to serve on the jury. Some half a century later Malaysians today are more educated and the pool of jurors can easily be drawn from the electoral rolls.

The jury system would help reduce instances of miscarriage of justice due to corruption and corrupt judges.

“[4] a random survey of this blog alone has indicated a hi-number of idiots without critical thinking.[deleted] allasstra

Very interesting! But regretfully it is one observation that I must say I do not share. I mean about the high number.

You as attorney may exercise your preemptory challenges to get rid of potential jurors who have a low IQ. But sometimes you need dumb jurors to be on the panel! That depends. One type of preemptory challenges does not need to have reasons assigned. The other requires reasons and are limited in number of challenges.

[deleted]

Lawyers and people in law enforcement are not qualified to be jurors. I do not think there is a law exempting people with low IQs from serving as jurors. He or she must know, of course, right from wrong. If there is such a law then all our Cabinet Ministers are exempted.

In the U.S. jury consultants make good money!

Allastra,

No juror is “assigned to your case”. They are chosen from a pool of potential jurors from the electoral roll or from the data base of DMV – more like the latter.

But your lawyer is allowed to exercise what they call ‘preemptory challenges’ until he gets the right type of jurors that he thinks would be good for your case. The jurors must number a minimum twelve (not including alternate jurors) and all must be agreed to by both lawyers.

Jury selection is a specialized field and jury consultants in the U.S. make tons of money sometimes as much as $250k per case that goes to trial.

Think again. The traditional view is that justice is about you being tried by a jury of your peers and not by a judge.

If you are a rich client and you have the best legal brains working for you, it may make a difference bearing in mind that a defendant can only be found ‘not guilty’ which is not the same as saying he or she is innocent. I can give that to you.

But in most cases if the veracity of the evidence is against you, no matter who represents you, you are likely to be found guilty. There will be miscarriage of justice, of course, since the adversarial system is not perfect but this is the best we have.

We have prisoners languishing in jail for some ten years only to be released because of a third party’s DNA evidence found at the scene of the crime, evidence which was not available at the time of trial. In many cases they did the crime but in view of new DNA evidence surfacing years later, it can no longer be said that it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that he did the crime.

In a jury trial it can be argued that the defendant stands a better chance of being found not guilty – than in a non-jury trial where the judge is both the trier of the law and the facts. In a developing country where the level of poverty is high, the rate of literacy is low, you have difficulty in identifying jurors. I do not think Malaysia today falls in that category.

Both micro and macro aspects of justice will have to be considered in the drive for judicial reforms.

“—really ?…are average malaysian hightly literated ? i.e..have ablity to comprehend sophisticated legal babel ?” allasstra

You do not need to be legally qualified, understand legal jargon or be literate in the meaning and use of legal terminology to qualify and serve as jurors. In fact lawyers are not qualified to serve as jurors. You must be tried by a jury of your peers who are ordinary folks.

Jurisdictions which follow jury trials and non-jury trials (sometimes there is a choice, others mandatory), the only qualification is your age which is 18 and whether you are a citizen.

Members of law enforcement agencies are not qualified to serve as jurors to prevent bias or the appearance of bias.

The system of preemptory challenges is to ensure that you get jurors who are not biased against you. However, gender and race are not grounds and challenges cannot be mounted on grounds of race and gender. But of course there are ways since you do not have to assign reasons for some of the preemptory challenges.