KUALA LUMPUR: Lawyers should not share details of court proceedings on social media as doing so is a breach of professional ethics, according to lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla.
He also said lawyers posting proceedings on social media might not be providing a full picture of the cases on trial, resulting in netizens being misinformed.
“We are not doing (court) trials on social media. When we (lawyers) do such things, we should not blame the netizens or common individuals for making outrageous comments on court cases. Because it is the lawyers themselves who are encouraging them to do so,” he added.
He was commenting on police reports lodged against one of the lawyers representing Rumah Bonda founder Siti Bainun Ahd Razali who has been charged with neglecting and abusing a Down Syndrome teenager.
Reports have been made against lawyer Hafidzah Hassan for allegedly tweeting information and cross-examination details involving Yasmin Nahar Mahmood, one of the witnesses in the ongoing court case.
Speaking at an online forum last night, Haniff said he would always decline to comment on cases that he handled when participating in talks.
Be mindful when making comments
On netizens making comments on court decisions, Haniff said while the constitution allowed freedom of speech, they must be mindful of legal restrictions that were in place.
He said netizens would make their own assessment of the court decisions based on the press coverage of the cases and social media. The press coverage, he said, might have errors and these also might not properly explain the cases, especially investigations carried out.
He said this in response to the uproar by netizens over the Johor Bahru High Court’s sentencing of clerk Sam Ke Ting to six years’ jail and RM6,000 in fines for “reckless driving” which led to the death of eight teenagers who were riding modified bicycles in Johor Bahru in 2017.
The lawyer said netizens who criticised the court decision might be in contempt of court.
He also took to task netizens who said the judge was wrong in his decision.
“How do you know that (the judge is wrong)? Do you know the facts of the case?”.
Commenting on the petition that was recently launched – calling for Sam’s jail sentence to be overturned – he said there were no legal restrictions preventing people from filing petitions.
“But is the petition made for Sam Ke Ting delivered with an accurate understanding of the law? I doubt it. Many who sign the petition seem to have the opinion that the issue is about teenagers with ‘basikal lajak’ on highways.
“If that is how people understand the issue when they sign the petition, then the petition is on a fragile foundation,” he added.
He also said petitions would not play a role in determining the outcome of any case as judges would only make decisions based on testimonies given in court. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.