Lately, there has been much talk about a new wave that has taken this country by storm and it's called the 'sub judice wave'.
So, I decided to do some research and to my surprise, the extent of this phenomenon is quite far reaching I must say.
There was a legal case in court where the plaintiff was asked a question by the opposing lawyer, the answer to which might cripple the plaintiff's case.
The plaintiff, instead of answering the question, turned to the presiding judge and said he refused to answer the question and invoked sub judice. The plaintiff won the case.
There was a doctor, who was treating a patient for some years, who had to reveal some much disappointing news to that patient of his.
When the patient asked the doctor how long he had before his time was up, the doctor said to him that he could not answer the question and invoked sub judice. Needless to say, the patient passed away shortly thereafter.
A headmaster of a school, who was facing a disciplinary action hearing at a tribunal, was asked why he had pornographic material in his mobile phone.
The headmaster refused to answer the tribunal and invoked sub judice. The headmaster was transferred to another school, along with his pornographic material.
A housing developer, who just completed the construction of a housing area, was shocked to find out that the houses built were falling into pieces.
When mobbed by angry purchasers, he apologised and told the angry crowd that he could not answer them and invoked sub judice. The crowd calmed down and left.
A banker, when queried by a board as to why he allowed a transaction involving hugh sums of money, without going through the proper channel, said that he was unable to answer and invoked sub judice. The board told him not to do it again, in any event.
A politician was caught red handed with billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money in his personal account. When asked why he had so much money in his personal account, the politician refused to answer and invoked sub judice.
Oh wait, my mistake. No one of authority actually asked the politician why he had so much money in his personal account. But he invoked sub judice anyway. He is apparently still a politician, and is good friends with the banker mentioned above.
My dear Malaysians, if you do find yourselves caught right smack in the middle of this phenomenon, there is only one cure. Please use logic and common sense for instant relief.
In loving memory of K Chandra.
PUTHAN PERUMAL is an advocate and solicitor of the High Court of Malaya.