Karpal asserted that Skinner was not sufficiently fluent in Bahasa Malaysia to comprehend the full 105-page judgment. — File pic
A five-member panel chaired by Federal Court judge Datuk Hashim Yusoff said there was no basis to say that there was coram failure.
Karpal had wanted the court to review a decision of the Court of Appeal, which had also rejected his application to set aside the decision of another Court of Appeal panel that ordered him to enter his defence on a sedition charge.
In his review application, Karpal cited coram failure because one of the three judges, Justice Datuk Clement Allan Skinner, was allegedly not proficient in Bahasa Malaysia and, hence, could not be in a position to understand the 105-page judgment written in Bahasa Malaysia by Justice Datuk Ahmad Maarop who had led that Court of Appeal panel.
Federal Court judges Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong, Datin Paduka Zaleha Zahari, Datuk Zainun Ali and Datuk Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha were the other judges presiding on the panel today.
On June 11, 2010, Karpal Singh was discharged and acquitted by the High Court at the end of the prosecution’s case on a charge of uttering seditious words against the Sultan of Perak at his legal firm in Jalan Pudu Lama, Kuala Lumpur, between noon and 12.30 pm on February 6, 2009.
Karpal, 71, was alleged to have said that the Sultan’s removal of Datuk Seri Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin as the Perak mentri besar and Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir’s appointment to the position could be questioned in a court of law.
On January 20 this year, the Court of Appeal panel comprising Justices Datuk Ahmad Maarop, Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali and Skinner allowed the prosecution’s appeal to set aside Karpal’s acquittal and ordered him to enter his defence.
Karpal subsequently filed a review at the Court of Appeal against the January 20 decision but he was unsuccessful as a three-member panel chaired by Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Raus Md Shariff dismissed his review application on April 5 this year.
In the proceedings today, Karpal submitted that Raus, in deciding his (Karpal’s) review application at the Court of Appeal, had said Justice Skinner may not be fluent in Bahasa Malaysia but it did not mean he could not understand Bahasa Malaysia.
He said a judge must be fluent in a language and it was not enough for a judge to just be able to understand a language.
Karpal said judges from East Malaysia usually do not understand Bahasa Malaysia properly, especially the older ones, and added that Skinner, who was born in Myanmar, was a Sabahan.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Noorin Badarudin argued that there cannot be a miscarriage of justice when allegations were made purely on conjecture and unsubstantiated belief of a party to a proceeding.
She said there must be cogent evidence to say that Skinner was incapacitated, which was tantamount to coram failure.
“He (Karpal) believes Justice Skinner is not fluent in Bahasa Malaysia. He believes Justice Skinner could not understand the 105-page judgement,” she said.
She said she was conducting the appeal where Skinner was one of the judges, and added that the judge (Skinner) was very interactive in the appeal proceeding.
Noorin said Karpal failed to satisfy the court that the order of the Court of Appeal (in ordering him to enter his defence) was a nullity, and added that that panel was properly constituted. — Bernama
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.