Yoursay: Surendran’s argument against ex-CJ crystal clear

YOURSAY | 'It just shows how illiterate and nonsensical some of our judges are.'

Unwarranted attack by ex-CJ Hamid upon new AG

Vijay47: In a situation such as this, where a retired judge unexpectedly produces a commentary on issues as important as the appointment and role of an attorney-general, one would naturally assume that the author would be guided by both wisdom in his given field and fairness, considering that he was once not just a judge but the chief justice at that.

Abdul Hamid Mohamad tried, without much success, to convince us of this, offering to even support attorney-general Tommy Thomas if need be, and then proceeding to employ a cunning mixof words that basically imply that the new AG is an ignorant, unqualified, mercenary ambulance-chaser.

Such is the sly viciousness from this former judge that he brings himself under the microscope.

We then remember his performance on the bench, that he was an abhorrent member of the judiciary, driven by racist tendencies, guided by irrelevant ridiculous religious doctrine, whose decisions often left us shocked and outraged.

As evidence of his profound learning and no doubt to keep potential critics at bay, Abdul Hamid quotes from the Constitution, not even realising that the relevant article had long been amended. And this from a man who was once a judge and chief justice.

When we also remember that he keeps openly intimate company with racist organisations and indulges in blatant political positions, we can only conclude the quality of judges foisted upon us.

We don’t even need to consider his gem of judicial enlightenment - that Muslims do not lie.

Sunshine: Reading lawyer N Surendran’s pointed rebuttal of Hamid’s statements leaves one strongly suspicious of this former judge’s objectivity on matters raised.

One is even left with a worry as whether we may have had a narrow-minded individual in the bench when he was there.

Then again, in all fairness to this honourable justice, it would be quite an interesting academic exercise for students in law colleges locally to take up some of Hamid’s previous judgments in serious tutorial discussions.

Pisang Goreng: Thank you for a crystal-clear argument, Surendran. If only false statements from the likes of Hamid could be challenged by reporters on the ground...

Ravinder: The AG's decision not to act for the Election Commission (EC) is most apt. The EC itself claims that it is not a government agency but an independent body. But Abdul Hamid is actually admitting that the EC is not an independent body, but an agency of the government.

Thank you, Abdul Hamid, for letting the cat out of the bag and for confirming what Malaysians have been saying about the EC – that is, the EC is merely an errand boy for the ruling party as it reports directly to the PM, who is head of the ruling political party.

Thus, it is a servant of that political party and the AG has no business to defend it in court.

ProPeR: Remember Surendran, this man was not appointed through meritocracy. He was more a political appointee. He had meted out very unjust decisions in favour of BN.

Ignore 'oxymorons' like him. It’s a waste of time.

Anonymous_12345007: Yes, it goes without saying that the ex-CJ was appointed not based on merit but on loyalty to BN. Hence, he cannot be expected to be knowledgeable and erudite.

Tom S: How a person with such low intellect was elevated to become the CJ of our country boggles me.

FairMalaysian: Surendran, this is an excellent rebuttal. How on earth did Hamid become the CJ? Indeed, former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram had commented about him before.

Even a first-year law student may be able to tell the presumption of conflict of interest if the AG represents the EC.

Anonymous 2350931441161169: I wondered how on earth a "judge" like Hamid could become a chief justice when he couldn't even understand comments/announcements in simple English.

True, it may be interesting for law undergraduates to analyse Hamid's past court cases to determine whether there were elements of bias which may had influenced his decision.

I’m really doubtful of his ability if his past comments and talks are anything to go by.

Non-Evader: Amazing, an ex-CJ came out with those SPM-level arguments to try to convince the world his biased views on the current AG.

He tarnishes not only his own reputation but our judiciary's as well. Thank you, Surendran, for penning this excellent article and saving us from the embarrassment caused by this ex-CJ.

Lakhy Perth: Superb answer, Surendran. This former CJ is the BN-era manufactured CJ. He has no credibility.

Anonymous: On a scale of 10,10 being the best, I would rate Hamid a 2 and Tommy an 8. Do we need to pay attention to this man? He's just jealous, period.

Lodestar: So, the new AG's four decades of experience in complex civil and commercial cases makes him an ideal person to conduct the upcoming 1MDB prosecution?

But what the former CJ is saying is that Tommy Thomas only has experience at the defence end, never at the prosecution end.

One should not react so furiously to legitimate criticism but instead investigate how the AG's Chambers can supplement such deficiencies.

Anonymous_db56f03b: The people of Malaysia have no trust whatsoever in the judiciary. It is good that Tommy Thomas comes from the private sector. Someone who is untainted and untarnished by the likes of you, ex-chief justice.

Your very presence reminds us of an era of political and racial divisiveness that was propagated by a much-loathed ex-regime that even now fills us with disgust.

It will take us years to rid this country of your kind, if ever. May you never enjoy peace and retirement. -Mkini