“There is clearly something amiss in the appointment of judges where an extremist with racial and religious prejudice could rise up.”
FMT
KUALA LUMPUR: The Opposition wants to know, taking its cue from the social media, the legal fraternity and various press statements, how former Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad could rise up to become the top judicial officer of the land.
The question arises after Abdul Hamid has been linked of late with various extremist, racist, prejudiced, and bigoted public statements.
“There is clearly something amiss in the appointment and promotion of judges in Malaysia where an extremist with racial and religious prejudice could rise up all the way to become Chief Justice of the country,” said DAP elder statesman Lim Kit Siang in a statement.
“Hamid should have been hauled before the judicial tribunal for extremist, racial and religious prejudice and not be allowed to be promoted up the judicial ladder.”
Instead, noted Lim, he rose up the judiciary ranks from High Court to Court of Appeal and Federal Court, and was then appointed Court of Appeal President and Chief Justice of Malaysia. Hamid was elevated to the highest judicial post when he was appointed Chief Justice from 2007-2008, succeeding Fairuz Abdul Halim, and preceding Zaki Azmi.
Lim, also DAP Parliamentary Leader and Gelang Patah MP, said that many people have still not got over a recent statement by Hamid that Malays in the peninsula will end up like the Red Indians in America i.e. on reservations if PAS and Umno do not work together to “defend the Government from PKR and DAP”.
It was not known whether Hamid was referring to the reservations created by the British by gazette in the peninsula to get the Malay-speaking Muslim communities out of the way so that they could plant rubber and mine tin.
“Hamid was never interested in national unity in the sense of Malaysian unity but only in his concept of Malay unity,” said Lim in pointing out that majority rule, under the law, meant that in the legislature irrespective of the ethnic composition. “It’s a fallacy that Malay unity means PAS and Umno coming together.”
“The Malays and Islam could not be under threat after 57 years of Umno government under six Umno Prime Ministers.”
Lim, holding up Hamid’s “black record”, referred to retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram telling the media not so long ago that “the errant member of the bench” had shown extremist prejudice in a decision on a civil case which he heard as a High Court judge in the 90s.
Hamid, who had written the judgment in Bahasa Malaysia, apparently accepted the claim by a Malay defendant because “as a Muslim he would not tell lies”. He, however, did not accept the allegation of an Indian gentleman who was the partner. The bank and the Indian gentleman appealed to the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal, comprising Gopal Sri Ram, the late Abdul Malek Ahmad and Siti Normah Yaakob, dismissed the bank’s appeal, set aside Hamid’s judgment and ordered a re-trial.
In that case, the bank had sued the two business partners, the Malay and Indian, who had stood guarantors for a loan. Both defendants relied on the defence that their signatures were forged by a third party.
KUALA LUMPUR: The Opposition wants to know, taking its cue from the social media, the legal fraternity and various press statements, how former Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad could rise up to become the top judicial officer of the land.
The question arises after Abdul Hamid has been linked of late with various extremist, racist, prejudiced, and bigoted public statements.
“There is clearly something amiss in the appointment and promotion of judges in Malaysia where an extremist with racial and religious prejudice could rise up all the way to become Chief Justice of the country,” said DAP elder statesman Lim Kit Siang in a statement.
“Hamid should have been hauled before the judicial tribunal for extremist, racial and religious prejudice and not be allowed to be promoted up the judicial ladder.”
Instead, noted Lim, he rose up the judiciary ranks from High Court to Court of Appeal and Federal Court, and was then appointed Court of Appeal President and Chief Justice of Malaysia. Hamid was elevated to the highest judicial post when he was appointed Chief Justice from 2007-2008, succeeding Fairuz Abdul Halim, and preceding Zaki Azmi.
Lim, also DAP Parliamentary Leader and Gelang Patah MP, said that many people have still not got over a recent statement by Hamid that Malays in the peninsula will end up like the Red Indians in America i.e. on reservations if PAS and Umno do not work together to “defend the Government from PKR and DAP”.
It was not known whether Hamid was referring to the reservations created by the British by gazette in the peninsula to get the Malay-speaking Muslim communities out of the way so that they could plant rubber and mine tin.
“Hamid was never interested in national unity in the sense of Malaysian unity but only in his concept of Malay unity,” said Lim in pointing out that majority rule, under the law, meant that in the legislature irrespective of the ethnic composition. “It’s a fallacy that Malay unity means PAS and Umno coming together.”
“The Malays and Islam could not be under threat after 57 years of Umno government under six Umno Prime Ministers.”
Lim, holding up Hamid’s “black record”, referred to retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram telling the media not so long ago that “the errant member of the bench” had shown extremist prejudice in a decision on a civil case which he heard as a High Court judge in the 90s.
Hamid, who had written the judgment in Bahasa Malaysia, apparently accepted the claim by a Malay defendant because “as a Muslim he would not tell lies”. He, however, did not accept the allegation of an Indian gentleman who was the partner. The bank and the Indian gentleman appealed to the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal, comprising Gopal Sri Ram, the late Abdul Malek Ahmad and Siti Normah Yaakob, dismissed the bank’s appeal, set aside Hamid’s judgment and ordered a re-trial.
In that case, the bank had sued the two business partners, the Malay and Indian, who had stood guarantors for a loan. Both defendants relied on the defence that their signatures were forged by a third party.
No comments:
Post a Comment