'Judiciary wrongly painted as villain when prosecution withdraws charges'

 

Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said that the judiciary has been unfairly painted as the villain for the public prosecutor’s bid to withdraw criminal charges.

During the Opening of Legal Year 2024 in Putrajaya today, the top judge urged the public to understand that the courts have limited choices in the matter.

In her speech, Tengku Maimun said when the prosecution seeks to withdraw such charges, the criminal court can only allow a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA), or a full acquittal.

She then referred to a high-profile criminal case last year without naming the accused, whereby certain quarters painted the judge who allowed the DNAA as corrupt and/or incompetent.

The public needs to understand, she said, that the person responsible for the decision is the public prosecutor and not the courts, noting that it is often the courts that are chastised for such decisions leading to the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary.

She noted that the public prosecutor’s decision was not well-received by the public but that a large part of the blame was put on the judiciary for making the consequential orders upon withdrawal of the charges.

Other cases

“There is another example which relates to how the judiciary is unjustifiability painted as the villain for the actions or inactions of another body in the justice system,” Tengku Maimun said.

In two other court cases, this was exacerbated by comments from the public made in the aftermath of the cases, with one of them being the 2021 Federal Court ruling that Selangor’s state law prohibiting unnatural sex is invalid and unconstitutional.

The other case is a successful 2021 legal challenge by Sisters in Islam (SIS) for a declaration that Selangor has no power to enact a law empowering only the state Syariah Court to hear legal challenges against the state religious authorities's decision.

SIS sought to rely on the 2021 ruling to bolster its separate bid to quash a Selangor fatwa that declared the women empowerment group as deviant.

On Sept 4 last year, the prosecution applied for the withdrawal of the Yayasan Akalbudi corruption case against Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. The Kuala Lumpur High Court allowed the prosecutor’s bid for DNAA.

Unlike a full acquittal, a DNAA still opens the accused to being recharged if the prosecutors decide to do so in future.

Tengku Maimun said it was unfortunate that certain quarters had whipped up public sentiment over the two Selangor state law-linked court cases to be more than what they were.

"These cases had nothing to do with the fact of the pure religion of Islam. They merely sought to reemphasise the clear demarcation of the powers between the federation and the states.

"The legislation in question had purported to accord certain powers to the state that were not supported by the State List (in the Federal Constitution) and the two cases would have been decided using the same principles, if the state legislation in question had dealt with any other matters not affecting the administration of the religion of Islam or the syariah courts.

"The comments by certain irresponsible parties are targeted at painting the picture that the judiciary has an ‘agenda’ or motives to eradicate Islam in this country, or an agenda to remove the Islamic legal system,” she said.

"Apart from manipulating these cases for their own gain, what these parties fail to mention is that by clearly interpreting the Federal Constitution and defining the powers of Parliament and the state legislatures, the Federal Court ensures the continuous and steady application of Islamic law in the states because it guarantees that even Parliament cannot erode it," she added.

Attack on judges

The top judge added that certain public comments over the two cases had unjustifiably questioned the personal faith of certain judges or even their motivation for deciding as such.

"In other respects, such comments incite hatred and ill will among the public against the judiciary or the fear of the perceived distorted outcome of such decisions.

“In certain other respects, large crowds are mobilised and their presence is used to intimidate the judges," Tengku Maimun lamented.

However, she added that recently, people from all walks of life have told her that the judiciary has redeemed itself as an independent institution both in substance and in perception. - Mkini