The real issue behind the CJ debate
COMMENT | Yesterday, former Federal Court judge Suriyadi Halim Omar added his voice to the growing list of elite defenders of Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat following her speech in Malta.
His words were kind, his tone reassuring, and his praise for her integrity sincere.
But with due respect, we must ask: when did this debate become about character, rather than the Constitution?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Express
an hour ago
- Daily Express
Anwar allowed interim stay, June 16 civil suit vacated
Published on: Tuesday, June 10, 2025 Published on: Tue, Jun 10, 2025 By: V Anbalagan Text Size: The Court of Appeal said Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim had shown special circumstances justifying the grant of a stay of the trial. PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has granted Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim an ad-interim stay of a civil suit brought by a former research assistant over an alleged assault. The temporary stay is pending a full hearing of the prime minister's application, which will take place on July 21. Advertisement A three-member bench chaired by Justice Supang Lian said Anwar had shown special circumstances to justify the grant of the application. 'We are of the considered view that under Section 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, we are empowered to make an ad-interim order to preserve the integrity of the appellant's (Anwar) stay. 'Accordingly, the trial in the High Court will be stayed pending the disposal of the stay application,' said Supang. Also on the panel hearing the application were Justices Faizah Jamaludin and Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin. The bench also clarified that parties need not exchange witness statements on Friday (June 13) as directed by High Court judge Roz Mawar Rozain last week, given today's decision. The trial of the suit was scheduled to take place before Roz Mawar over seven days between June 16 and June 25 after she dismissed Anwar's reference application on grounds that none of the questions posed succeeded in crossing the threshold set out in Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act. In her 21-page judgment, she said the application was misconceived as to the jurisdiction of the courts, and was based on speculative doctrines with no constitutional footing. The prime minister wanted the apex court to rule on whether Articles 5(1), 8(1), 39, 40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution grant him qualified immunity from the suit filed by Yusoff Rawther four years ago. The suit filed by Yusoff relates to events which allegedly took place before Anwar took office on Nov 24, 2022. Anwar is appealing to the Court of Appeal against Roz Mawar's refusal to refer eight legal questions arising from the suit to the Federal Court for determination. He is seeking a stay of all proceedings pending the disposal of the appeal. Yusoff, a grandson of the late Penang consumer advocate SM Mohamed Idris, claims he was assaulted at Anwar's home in Segambut in October 2018. He is seeking general, special, aggravated and exemplary damages, as well as interest, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court. Anwar denies the claim and has filed a countersuit. Today, before the bench, lawyer Alan Wong, appearing for Anwar, said the appeal against Roz Mawar's decision would be rendered academic and nugatory if the interim stay was disallowed. 'There is no prejudice to the plaintiff if the trial is suspended. He can be compensated in the event that the plaintiff proves his case,' he added. He said the seven-day trial would also disrupt and cause irreversible harm to the prime minister's executive function. 'It is not an ordinary suit but one laced with political motive,' he added. Counsel Rafique Rashid Ali submitted that the appeal on the reference questions was doomed to fail as they were rhetorical and had no basis in Malaysian jurisprudence. He also said the defendant knew the trial dates as they were fixed on June 6 last year. 'Yet he filed the reference application 23 days before the trial was to start through his new solicitors,' Rafique said, adding that his client should have his day in court as the suit was filed in 2021. Lawyers Shahir Tahir, K Rajasegaran, and SM Kavyaasrini also appeared for Anwar while Nurmustanir Nor and Amirul Ar-Rashid Azman acted for Yusoff. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
The Star
3 hours ago
- The Star
Appeals court grants Anwar temporary stay in Yusoff Rawther suit
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has allowed an application by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to temporarily stay the hearing of a lawsuit filed by his former research assistant Muhammed Yusoff Rawther over allegations of sexual harassment. In a unanimous decision, a three-judge panel chaired by Justice Supang Lian said Tuesday (June 10) the appellate court was empowered under Section 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to make an ad interim order to preserve the integrity of Anwar's stay application pending the disposal of his appeal against the High Court's decision that dismissed his application to refer eight legal questions to the Federal Court. "Accordingly, we hereby make an ad interim order to stay all proceedings, including the full trial at the High Court," Justice Supang said in online proceedings. ALSO READ: High Court denies Anwar's request to refer questions to Federal Court The hearing of the main lawsuit by Yusoff was initially fixed to begin on Monday (June 16). Other judges on the bench were Justices Faizah Jamaludin and Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin. Earlier, the panel heard from Anwar's counsel, Alan Wong, that if the full trial proceeds, the effects would be "irreversible". "The constitutional issues raised (in the application) would have been overtaken by events," he said. Wong submitted that, as the appellant was a sitting prime minister, he would be required to divert his attention and resources from government business to attend to the trial, disrupting his official function. "To assist the court in appreciating the scale of this disruption, I have instructions to tender a copy of the Prime Minister's schedule during the trial period," he said, requesting that the document be received under seal. ALSO READ: Anwar files appeal against High Court's dismissal of bid to refer immunity questions to apex court Lawyer Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, who represented Yusoff, objected on the grounds that any introduction of a material should have been done in an affidavit form. Rafique also submitted that the trial dates were fixed a year ago on June 6 and this meant the appellant had "very well known" he was due in court. "The trial is supposed to commence next week. He (Anwar) has had more than enough time to prepare for this trial, knowing fully well that everyone has to submit to the court system," he said. Rafique also submitted that the court should consider whether or not the appeal has any chance or prospect of success. "Simply put, the appeal is doomed to fail. There are no special circumstances (to warrant the stay)," he said, adding that the trial must proceed. On the application to insert the Prime Minister's schedule, the panel said it took judicial notice of the matter. ALSO READ: Anwar: It was never about immunity "We take judicial notice that the Prime Minister is busy and has a full schedule on any day. Therefore, there is no necessity to tender the schedule as proposed," Justice Supang said. Anwar is applying for a stay of the main trial in the lawsuit pending his appeal against the High Court's decision that rejected his application to refer eight legal questions to the Federal Court, including whether he is immune from lawsuits. The questions include whether, under Articles 39, 40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution, a sitting prime minister enjoys limited immunity from lawsuits involving allegations of personal conduct that occurred before his appointment. The application by Anwar was concerning a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Yusoff, who claimed sexual assault in 2018. On June 4, High Court judge Justice Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed Anwar's application on the grounds that the questions failed to meet the threshold for referral under the Federal Constitution and the Courts of Judicature Act. On July 14, 2021, Yusoff filed the lawsuit against Anwar, who contended in his defence that the plaintiff had lied under oath to authorities regarding the alleged assault. Anwar then filed a counterclaim on Sept 28, 2021, alleging that Yusoff had fabricated the story to tarnish his political career and prevent him from becoming prime minister. The hearing for a full stay application has been fixed for July 21.
The Star
9 hours ago
- The Star
Lee's election law violation hearing postponed indefinitely
A Seoul court has said that it will indefinitely postpone a trial of President Lee Jae-myung ( pic ) on charges of violating the election law in 2022. South Korea's Supreme Court ruled in May, before Lee was elected, that he had violated the election law by publicly making 'false statements' during his 2022 presidential bid, and sent the case back to an appeals court. The Seoul High Court, which had scheduled a hearing for the case on June 18, said yesterday that it will postpone the hearing 'to be decided later' without a date, a court spokesperson confirmed. Lee's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The court said its decision to postpone the hearing was due to 'Constitution Article 84', without elaborating. South Korea's Constitution, Article 84, says a sitting president is 'not subject to criminal prosecution while in office' for most crimes. However, legal experts are divided on whether that applies to ongoing trials that were already prosecuted before a president was elected. The National Court Administration under the Supreme Court gave as its opinion that judges of each court where Lee's trials are being held will have to decide whether to stop or proceed, according to its statement to a lawmaker in May. 'The court in charge of hearing the case will determine whether Article 84 of the Constitution should be applied to a criminal defendant who was elected in the presidential election,' the statement said. Lee's ruling Democratic Party, which controls parliament, is planning to pass a Bill this week which suspends ongoing trials for the incumbent president, local broadcaster KBS reported yesterday. The Constitutional Court may be asked to rule whether the Bill is unconstitutional, legal experts have said. — Reuters
