Share |

Wednesday 26 May 2010

Taking our country back : Judiciary must be the first port of call

By Haris Ibrahim,

Last week, Malaysiakini reported that Anwar’s application to the Court of Appeal to stay the proceedings of the sodomy trial in the High Court was dismissed.
What I found to be telling was that, as reported, Justice Zaharah had replaced Justice Md Apandi Ali, who had recused himself from hearing the application after Karpal objected to his hearing the same, on the grounds that Apandi had once held the position of Kelantan Umno treasurer and had served as the legal advisor to Kelantan Umno, and that there was therefore the likelihood of bias.
Now, yesterday, Zaid’s team of lawyers filed his petition to nullify the recent Hulu Selangor by-election results.
Malaysiakini reported yesterday that Imtiaz, one of Zaid’s lawyers, ecplained that the petition would have to be heard within 6 months and focuses on the issue of election bribery, specifically, Najib’s promise of RM3 million to the Chinese school and the monetary offers to the Felda settlers.
Malaysiakini also reports that Imtiaz said that the petition will be heard and decided in the course of a trial presided over by a judge appointed by the Chief Justice.
The Chief Justice is Zaki, who once served on Umno’s discliplinary committee and once was involved in the destruction of incriminating evidence, to wit, burning his marriage certificate issued in Thailand to avoid the same being discovered by his first wife.
Zaki also used to represent Umno in court proceedings.

My question.
Should Zaki be deciding which judge hears Zaid’s petition?
If Apandi could not hear Anwar’s application on the principle of likelihhood of bias, given his past connection with Umno, how can Zaki, applying the same principle, be in any way involved with Zaid’s petition, including the selection of the judge who is going to hear and dispose of the same?
Remember the Likas election petition?
How in the written judgment, in declaring the election results null and void, Justice Muhd Kamil Awang disclosed the matter of a phone call from a judicial superior, urging him to dispose of the petition in a certain way?
How Eusoff Chin then publicly admitted making a call to Kamil but denied trying to influence Kamil’s decision in that petition?
To the best of my knowledge, Eusoff had no known affiliations with Umno and yet…
What more, then, one who was so closely connected to Umno?
What of any petitions filed to annul any election results in the 13th GE?
Can we trust Zaki to decide who hears those petitions?
Was this, then, the real reason why Pak Lah doggedly went on with Zaki’s appointment to the judiciary, notwithstanding the protest from so many?
Is there nothing we can do?

No comments: