Archive for category Court
Marimuthu Periasamy files habeas corpus writ for release of wife and six children
Rubber tapper Marimuthu Periasamy, 43, has today filed habeas corpus writ for the release of his wife Raimah Bibi a/p Noordin and six children, Yoogneswary 12, Paramila 11, Hariharan 8, Ravindran 5, Shamala 5 and Keberan 4 from detention by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department for the past 17 days.
Periasamy, who filed the action through DAP National Chairman Karpal Singh as counsel, is seeking to be reunited with his wife and six children who were forcibly separated from him on 2nd April 2007 on the ground that they were Muslims.
Periasamy has filed a supporting affidavit stating that he and his wife were at all material times of the Indian race and they practiced and professed the Hindu religion. They brought up their chileren in the Hindu religion and beliefs.
Their children were given Indian names and they had lived in peace without interruption even though they earn a modest living.
Things changed in the morning of 2nd April 2007 when seven officers acting on behalf of the Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) raided their residence in Kampung Baru Tambahan, Ulu Yang, Selangor, detaining his wife and six children and forcibly took them away from their house. Marimuthu was threatened with “khalwat” if he attempted to stop them. Read the rest of this entry »
Forcible separation of Marimuthu from wife and six children – habeas corpus writ
DAP National Chairman Karpal Singh will file habeas corpus application for rubber-tapper Marimuthu a/l Periasamy to be reunited with his wife, Raimah Bibi a/p Noordin and six children (Yogneswary 12, Paramila 11, Hariharen 8, Shamala 5, Ravindran 5 and Kuberan, 4) who had been forcibly separated from him for two weeks by Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS).
On 2nd April, 2007, seven officers from JAIS came to his house in Kampung Baru Tambahan Ulu Yam Lama, Selangor and told him that his wife of 21 years was a Muslim and that she and the six children must be placed in a rehabilitation centre.
Marimuthu, 44, had no choice but to let the officers take his family away.
He said an “ustaz” told him to convert to Islam or threatened to charge him for khalwat with Raimah.
Raimah, who returned to help him with the rubber tapping work two days later, told him that Jais had placed the family in the nearby Kampung Melayu Liga Emas, a Muslim Malay populated area, so that the neighbours can keep an eye on her daily activities and prevent her from meeting with any outsiders, particularly her Hindu husband. Read the rest of this entry »
Judges who accept bribes – Fairuz must take action or resign as CJ
Posted by Kit in Corruption, Court on Saturday, 24 March 2007
When I was speaking in Parliament on Wednesday during the debate on the Motion of Thanks on the Royal Address and touching on the judiciary as another institution which had suffered in the last 50 years of nationhood in terms of loss of public confidence in its independence, impartiality and integrity, DAP National Chairman and MP for Bukit Glugor Karpal Singh interrupted me to raise a specific question.
Karpal asked whether I agree that as the Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim had made it very clear that there are judges who are corrupt, it has become the duty and responsibility of the Chief Justice to lodge a police report to enable a full investigation to be conducted to ascertain as to who are the corrupt judges.
In my response, I expressed my full agreement that to protect the good name of the judiciary, Tun Ahmad Fairuz should either lodge a police against the corrupt judges who “accept bribes” which he had stated publicly or resign as Chief Justice.
There is actually another option open to the Chief Justice — which is to invoke Article 125(3) of the Federal Constitution to set up a judicial tribunal for the dismissal of the judges who accept bribes. This Article provides that the Chief Justice, after consulting the Prime Minister, is empowered to represent to the Yang di Pertuan Agong for the establishment of a tribunal for the removal of a judge for judicial misconduct.
Tun Ahmad Fairuz must take action against the judges he had accused of taking bribes, whether by lodging a police report or invoking Article 152(3) of the Federal Constitution, and if he not prepared to do either, he should resign as Chief Justice to protect the reputation and integrity of the Malaysian judiciary.
There can be nothing more serious against the reputation and integrity of judges than the charges which the Chief Justice had levelled in his speech during the swearing-in ceremony of eight new judicial commissioners on March 1 – that there are judges who accept bribes. Read the rest of this entry »
Why still no Chief Judge of Malaya after 2 1/2 months?
Posted by Kit in Court, Parliament on Friday, 23 March 2007
Fourthly, on an independent judiciary — Malaysia was held in high international esteem until the 1988 judicial crisis, and the nation has not fully recovered from the trauma and fall-outs of the successive series of judicial crisis for the ensuing 15 years. How to restore full public confidence in the system of justice in the country?
The answer by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Nazri Aziz to Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Glugor) yesterday that the government has no plans to set up a Judicial Commission for the appointment of judges is most deplorable.
What is even more shocking is that this is also the view of the Chief Justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim who had likened the proposal for an independent judicial commission on appointment and promotion of judges as akin to nudity rather than transparency. Such comment by the higher judicial officer in the land is most ill-advised, in poor taste and reflect badly on the office of Chief Justice.
Ahmad Fairuz may be unhappy with the proposal of an independent judicial commission to oversee the selection and promotion of judges, but he should realize that this proposal pre-dates his appointment to the top judicial post in the land and meant to enhance public confidence in the system of justice and in that context, there is nothing personal against any personal holder of the office.
Ahmad Fairuz should not have questioned the motives of those who had made the proposal, such as the Bar Council and several prominent lawyers, posing the rhetorical question: “Are we to allow whoever has cases in court and who lost to decide on the fate of judges?” He ignores the support of retired judges for the proposal.
It is absolutely wrong and inapt to categorise the proposal of an independent Judicial Commission as an exercise in nudity rather than transparency, especially when this judicial reform had been adopted by other countries such as Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Read the rest of this entry »
“Judges who accept bribes” – Ahmad Fairuz must take action or step down as Chief Justice
Posted by Kit in Corruption, Court on Saturday, 3 March 2007
The Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim dropped a bombshell at the swearing-in ceremony of eight new judicial commissioners in Putrajaya on Thursday when he exposed gross judicial misconduct in the judiciary, including:
- Judges who accept bribes;
- Judges who were often seen socializing with lawyers, prosecutors and corporate figures while hearing their cases in court; and
- Judges who were “constantly angry and foul-tempered”.
Ahmad Fairuz may have to step down as Chief Justice for tarnishing the image of the judiciary if he is not prepared to take action and substantiate his grave charges of judges accepting bribes or guilty of misconduct in acting unethically in socializing with parties while hearing their cases.
The Chief Justice had used the plural when he “hit out at judges who accept bribes”. Had he initiated action against “judges who accept bribes” under Article 124 of the Federal Constitution for the establishment of the judicial tribunal to remove these “rogue judges” or at least lodged police reports against them for full investigations to be started?
If Ahmad Fairuz had not initiated any action against “judges who accept bribes”, then the Chief Justice would be guilty of being a party to the commission of serious crimes which would not be compatible with his continued tenure as the highest judicial officer of the land. If he could not substantiate his allegation of judges accepting bribes, then he had made a most reckless and irresponsible statement seriously tarnishing the image of the judiciary.
Furthermore, what action had Ahmad Fairuz taken against judges for the judicial misconduct and unethical behaviour of “often seen socializing with lawyers, prosecutors and corporate figures” while hearing their cases in court or for “being constantly angry and bad-tempered”? Read the rest of this entry »
Judicial accountability – will the Altantuny murder trial be brought forward from March 2008?
Last week, when making his controversial, ill-advised and ill-considered comment likening the proposal for an independent judicial commission on appointment and promotion of judges as akin to nudity rather than transparency, the Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim claimed that he was both an advocate and practitioner of judicial accountability and transparency.
Ahmad Fairuz said: “I started (as the Chief Justice) in 2003 with accountability and integrity. We have been transparent.”
I have three questions for Ahmad Fairuz concerning accountability and integrity of the Chief Justice.
Firstly, will the Altantunya Shaariibuu murder trial set for hearing in March 2008 be brought forward in line with the maxim that “justice delayed is justice denied” as well as his earlier statement that the March 2008 trial date is “too far off”?
The Star in a front-page headline of 6th January 2007 “March 7, 2008: Altantunya murder trial — TOO LONG A WAIT” quoted the Chief Justice:
“The date is too far off. But we are appointing 16 new judges. Hopefully the trial can be brought forward.”
Secondly, what has happened to his public undertaking on his appointment as Chief Justice some four years ago in 2003 to recast the Judges’ Code of Ethics to restore public confidence in judicial independence, impartiality and integrity. Read the rest of this entry »
CJ Fairuz’s poor taste in equating Judicial Appointments Commission to “nudity”
The response of Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim likening proposal for an independent judicial commission on appointment and promotion of judges as akin to nudity rather than transparency is ill-advised, in poor taste and reflect badly on the office of Chief Justice.
Ahmad Fairuz may be unhappy with the proposal of an independent judicial commission to oversee the selection and promotion of judges, but he should realize that this proposal pre-dates his appointment to the top judicial post in the land and meant to enhance public confidence in the system of justice and in that context, there is nothing personal against any personal holder of the office.
Ahmad Fairuz should not have questioned the motives of those who had made the proposal, such as the Bar Council and several prominent lawyers, posing the rhetorical question:
“Are we to allow whoever has cases in court and who lost to decide on the fate of judges?”
He ignores the support of retired judges for the proposal.
While claiming to welcome any memorandum on the proposed independent judicial commission, Ahmad Fairuz made clear his opposition when he told the New Straits Times in Kota Baru after chairing a meeting with Kelantan judges yesterday:
“I started (as the Chief Justice) in 2003 with accountability and integrity. We have been transparent.
“But transparency should have its limits. Don’t tell me when we are transparent, we have to be nude. That is not transparency, that’s nudity.
“You want everything to be absolute? There is no such thing as absolute freedom or absolute transparency.
“That’s the way I look at things.”
In the first place, it is absolutely wrong and inapt to categorise the proposal of an independent Judicial Commission as an exercise in nudity rather than transparency, especially when this judicial reform had been adopted by other countries such as Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom.
Secondly, the proposal for a Judicial Appointments Commission was not made only during Fairuz’s tenure as Chief Justice. Read the rest of this entry »
-
You are currently browsing the archives for the Court category.
