Tajuk : IN RARE SHOW OF ETHICS, JUDGE RECUSES HIMSELF FROM NAJIB VS TONY PUA CASE URGING FOR ‘INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE DEFENDED’
link : IN RARE SHOW OF ETHICS, JUDGE RECUSES HIMSELF FROM NAJIB VS TONY PUA CASE URGING FOR ‘INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE DEFENDED’
IN RARE SHOW OF ETHICS, JUDGE RECUSES HIMSELF FROM NAJIB VS TONY PUA CASE URGING FOR ‘INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE DEFENDED’
High Court judicial commissioner Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh today recused himself from hearing the latest suit between Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak and Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua, in the interest of justice and the judiciary.
Wan Ahmad said he was a deputy home minister during Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s administration and a former senator as well. He resigned from all posts in Umno to take up the position in the judiciary.
He wrote a two-page reasoning on why he decided to recuse himself from hearing the case and will inform the Chief Judge of Malaya on his decision.
“It is a common knowledge that before being appointed to the bench, I was an active politician and at one time a member of the administration and the Dewan Negara,” the judicial commissioner said.
“For the record, on the eve of my appointment to the bench, I resigned from the political party that I used to be a member. I must add that I was never a member of the administration that was headed by the plaintiff (Najib).
“After taking my oath as a member of the judiciary, my only sacred duty is to preserve, protect and defend the Federal Constitution, without fear or favour,” he added.
Wan Ahmad was scheduled to hear an inter-parte application for an injunction after another judge, Justice Abu Bakar Jais, allowed Najib’s ex-parte application last month before he was transferred.
Both parties did not make an application to recuse Justice Wan Ahmad from hearing the case. He did it in his own accord which he duly stated in his reasoning.
The judicial commissioner came to the bench on Dec 16, 2015. He contested in the Kuala Terengganu by-election on an Umno ticket in 2009, against PAS, but lost by a majority of more than 2,000 votes.
‘Independent judiciary should be defended’
Wan Ahmad aded that public perception of the independence of the judiciary should not be shaken in anyway.
“Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done,” he said, quoting the legal maxim.
“The precious gift to any society is an independent judiciary. Once it is lost, society will be on the verge collapse. The independence of the judiciary must be defended at any cost.”
Before arriving at the decision, the judicial commissioner said, he asked himself two questions: whether he feels any bias towards any party in this proceeding and whether any fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that he (as the judge) would be biased.
On the first question, Wan Ahmad said, it has always been his practice on the bench that he would not have any regard for any extraneous matter and in the course of determining any issue, he would hold no prediction or preference whatsoever.
In addressing the second issue, he noted two important points, namely that the opinion of an informed and fair minded observer is not to be confused with the opinion of the litigant and also, the informed and fair minded observer is to be treated as knowing all the relevant circumstances and it is for the court to make an assessment of these.
Citing the independence of the judiciary as important, he said he was inclined to recuse himself. Wan Ahmad therefore ordered the ad interim injunction granted to Najib to be extended until a new judge is appointed.
The suit filed is over Pua’s Facebook live video post, where the words used were as if Pua had alleged that the prime minister had abused his powers by directing the cabinet, through the Dewan Rakyat speaker, to see the tabling of amendments to Act 355 by PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang. The matter has now been fixed for case management next Wednesday (May 31).
Lawyer Gobind Singh Deo, who appeared for Pua, commended the decision made by Wan Ahmad, calling it a correct decision.
Najib’s lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun also heralded Wan Ahmad Farid’s decision to recuse himself from hearing the case and said this showed the independence of the judiciary.
At another court, Justice Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim fixed Aug 21 for case management of Najib’s first suit against Pua, pending a decision by the Federal Court on Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s suit against Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times and Perkasa, and on the Sarawak government’s suit against Bandar Kuching MP Chong Chien Jen.
Gobind and Pua are required to brief the judge then on the outcome of these two cases, where the Derbyshire principle was cited on whether public authorities or public officials can sue.
In the Lim Guan Eng case, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Penang chief minister’s claim as they found he sued in his capacity as a public official, while in Chong’s case, the appellate court ruled that the Sarawak government could sue.
Chong’s appeal has been heard at the Federal Court but the judgment on it has been reserved, while Lim’s appeal against the Court of Appeal decision is yet to be heard.
– M’kini
.
✍ Sumber Pautan : ☕ Malaysia Chronicle
Kredit kepada pemilik laman asal dan sekira berminat untuk meneruskan bacaan sila klik link atau copy paste ke web server : http://ift.tt/2rfXYSE
(✿◠‿◠)✌ Mukah Pages : Pautan Viral Media Sensasi Tanpa Henti. Memuat-naik beraneka jenis artikel menarik setiap detik tanpa henti dari pelbagai sumber. Selamat membaca dan jangan lupa untuk 👍 Like & 💕 Share di media sosial anda!
High Court judicial commissioner Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh today recused himself from hearing the latest suit between Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak and Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua, in the interest of justice and the judiciary.
Wan Ahmad said he was a deputy home minister during Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s administration and a former senator as well. He resigned from all posts in Umno to take up the position in the judiciary.
He wrote a two-page reasoning on why he decided to recuse himself from hearing the case and will inform the Chief Judge of Malaya on his decision.
“It is a common knowledge that before being appointed to the bench, I was an active politician and at one time a member of the administration and the Dewan Negara,” the judicial commissioner said.
“For the record, on the eve of my appointment to the bench, I resigned from the political party that I used to be a member. I must add that I was never a member of the administration that was headed by the plaintiff (Najib).
“After taking my oath as a member of the judiciary, my only sacred duty is to preserve, protect and defend the Federal Constitution, without fear or favour,” he added.
Wan Ahmad was scheduled to hear an inter-parte application for an injunction after another judge, Justice Abu Bakar Jais, allowed Najib’s ex-parte application last month before he was transferred.
Both parties did not make an application to recuse Justice Wan Ahmad from hearing the case. He did it in his own accord which he duly stated in his reasoning.
The judicial commissioner came to the bench on Dec 16, 2015. He contested in the Kuala Terengganu by-election on an Umno ticket in 2009, against PAS, but lost by a majority of more than 2,000 votes.
‘Independent judiciary should be defended’
Wan Ahmad aded that public perception of the independence of the judiciary should not be shaken in anyway.
“Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done,” he said, quoting the legal maxim.
“The precious gift to any society is an independent judiciary. Once it is lost, society will be on the verge collapse. The independence of the judiciary must be defended at any cost.”
Before arriving at the decision, the judicial commissioner said, he asked himself two questions: whether he feels any bias towards any party in this proceeding and whether any fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that he (as the judge) would be biased.
On the first question, Wan Ahmad said, it has always been his practice on the bench that he would not have any regard for any extraneous matter and in the course of determining any issue, he would hold no prediction or preference
In addressing the second issue, he noted two important points, namely that the opinion of an informed and fair minded observer is not to be confused with the opinion of the litigant and also, the informed and fair minded observer is to be treated as knowing all the relevant circumstances and it is for the court to make an assessment of these.
Citing the independence of the judiciary as important, he said he was inclined to recuse himself. Wan Ahmad therefore ordered the ad interim injunction granted to Najib to be extended until a new judge is appointed.
The suit filed is over Pua’s Facebook live video post, where the words used were as if Pua had alleged that the prime minister had abused his powers by directing the cabinet, through the Dewan Rakyat speaker, to see the tabling of amendments to Act 355 by PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang. The matter has now been fixed for case management next Wednesday (May 31).
Lawyer Gobind Singh Deo, who appeared for Pua, commended the decision made by Wan Ahmad, calling it a correct decision.
Najib’s lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun also heralded Wan Ahmad Farid’s decision to recuse himself from hearing the case and said this showed the independence of the judiciary.
At another court, Justice Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim fixed Aug 21 for case management of Najib’s first suit against Pua, pending a decision by the Federal Court on Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s suit against Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times and Perkasa, and on the Sarawak government’s suit against Bandar Kuching MP Chong Chien Jen.
Gobind and Pua are required to brief the judge then on the outcome of these two cases, where the Derbyshire principle was cited on whether public authorities or public officials can sue.
In the Lim Guan Eng case, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Penang chief minister’s claim as they found he sued in his capacity as a public official, while in Chong’s case, the appellate court ruled that the Sarawak government could sue.
Chong’s appeal has been heard at the Federal Court but the judgment on it has been reserved, while Lim’s appeal against the Court of Appeal decision is yet to be heard.
– M’kini
.
✍ Sumber Pautan : ☕ Malaysia Chronicle
Kredit kepada pemilik laman asal dan sekira berminat untuk meneruskan bacaan sila klik link atau copy paste ke web server : http://ift.tt/2rfXYSE
(✿◠‿◠)✌ Mukah Pages : Pautan Viral Media Sensasi Tanpa Henti. Memuat-naik beraneka jenis artikel menarik setiap detik tanpa henti dari pelbagai sumber. Selamat membaca dan jangan lupa untuk 👍 Like & 💕 Share di media sosial anda!
dengan itu Perkara IN RARE SHOW OF ETHICS, JUDGE RECUSES HIMSELF FROM NAJIB VS TONY PUA CASE URGING FOR ‘INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE DEFENDED’
Kini anda membaca artikel IN RARE SHOW OF ETHICS, JUDGE RECUSES HIMSELF FROM NAJIB VS TONY PUA CASE URGING FOR ‘INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE DEFENDED’ dengan alamat pautan https://timesnewmalaysia.blogspot.com/2017/05/in-rare-show-of-ethics-judge-recuses.html
0 Response to "IN RARE SHOW OF ETHICS, JUDGE RECUSES HIMSELF FROM NAJIB VS TONY PUA CASE URGING FOR ‘INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE DEFENDED’"
Catat Ulasan