Legal expert Haniff Khatri Abdulla has described senior lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s remarks following former premier Najib Abdul Razak’s house arrest verdict on Monday as reasonable.
When contacted recently, he said Shafee’s remarks should not be singled out and scrutinised by sentences, but instead, be looked upon in their whole context.
“I must be very clear here. When you’re talking about possible contempt (or) rudeness to the court and all that, you cannot just look at one sentence (but) you must look at the whole picture.
“The statement, about how the verdict impacted the rulers’ powers, is a corollary conclusion from what he said earlier, which is, if the judge is correct in her interpretation, then the result of it is that the powers of the king are now questioned, shackled, and that the court is higher than the king’s power.
“That is a reasonable conclusion,” said Haniff (above, right).
He added that one cannot refrain from telling the court that they may have made a controversial error, as well as to let the public know there must be a separation of powers between the courts, Parliament, and the executive.
On Monday, the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed Najib’s house arrest bid after finding that the royal decree by the 16th Yang di-Pertuan Agong that permits him to serve the remainder of his jail sentence at home was invalid under the law as it was not issued according to procedures laid out under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution.
The former prime minister, in his application, claimed that the royal addendum was a supplementary order to the Pardons Board’s decision in late January last year to halve his 12-year SRC International jail sentence and reduce his RM210 million fine to RM50 million.
The sentence stems from convictions for abuse of power, criminal breach of trust, and money laundering involving RM42 million from SRC International.
Strong responses to remarks
In a press conference after the proceedings, Shafee claimed that the verdict reduces the powers of the Malay rulers.
Shafee had also asked for the Malay rulers and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to review the court’s decision, which he claimed would have a major impact on their powers.
However, his statements received strong responses, with DAP veteran Teng Chang Khim calling for the senior counsel to be cited for contempt of court.
Teng, in his statement, claimed that Shafee’s remarks were “ridiculous and amusing”, as well as claiming it was absolutely political, unethical, and unbecoming of a member of the Malaysian Bar to make such a remark outside the courtroom.
In a statement today, former deputy law minister Hanipa Maidin questioned whether the senior lawyer’s remarks meant that he was trying to rewrite Article 42 of the Constitution.
“Shafee seems to have conveniently ignored or completely disregarded the crucial word in Article 42, namely, the word ‘advice’. Instead, he used the word ‘discuss’.
“He ought to be fair. The constitutional language enshrined in Article 42 is crystal clear. Such prerogative powers must be exercised on the advice of a Pardons Board,” Hanipa said.
Following the High Court’s dismissal, Najib will remain in Kajang Prison to serve the rest of his sentence pending his appeal.
With his reduced jail time of six years, Najib’s sentence will end in August 2028. However, he may be released on good behaviour in August next year after serving two-thirds of his revised sentence. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.