Latest news with #ChiefJustice
BBC News
22-05-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
'Stop process to remove me' - Ghana suspended chief Justice tell Supreme Court
Di drama for di suspended chief justice of Ghana no dey end anytime soon. Dis na afta she don go di Supreme Court to stop di presidential committee wia dey investigate five petitions against her. President John Mahama on 22 April bin suspend Justice Gertrude Torkornoo according to di constitution when di council of state bin find "prima facie" case against her for di petitions wia pipo don file to di president against her. Na so im go ahead to select five-member committee to begin to investigate di suspended Chief Justice; in fact di committee already don start dia hearings, as dem dey sit three times every week. According to di kontri constitution for Article 146, dis kain hearing of cases against di chief justice and oda ogbonge officials, gatz to be behind closed doors. But inside di fresh suit wia Justice Gertrude Torkornoo don file for di Supreme Court against di process to remove her, she tok say she wan make dis committee hearing dey for di public. Dis na di third suit wia pipo don file for di supreme court to stop di process to remove di chief justice, since she bin chop suspension, afta di council of state find say di three petitions (later become five), get questions wia di chief justice gat to answer. Even tho di constitution dey clear about di process wia petitions to remove di chief justice gatz to go thru, opposition lawyers and oda pipo don go di supreme court to stop di process wey dey in motion now. Wetin be di process to remove di chief Justice According to Ghana constitution, to remove di chief Justice, di process dey clear. Someone gat to write petition to di president to explain why dem suppose sack di chief Justice. Afta dem write di petition, dis na di tins wey get to happun. Dis na di tins she dey demand from di Supreme Court On 6 May, di Supreme Court for dia 3-2 majority decision throway one injunction application wia one opposition lawmaker Vincent Ekow Assafuah, bin file against di removal process. Di lawmaker try to get di court to stop di process wia dem describe as "illegal." Na so for 21 May, di Supreme Court again for majority 4-1 decision, throway anoda injunction application by one interest group against di process to remove di chief justice so far. But few hours afta di Supreme Court dismiss di latest application, di suspended chief justice herself carry di mata go di same Supreme Court. Justice Gertrude Torkornoo now bin sue di attorney general and di five members of di panel wia dey investigate di five petitions against her. Pipo kwesion why di former Attorney general na lawyer to di suspended chief justice Sabi pipo kwesion why di former attorney general na lawyer for suspended chief justice for dis mata Former director for di Ghana School of Law, Kwaku Ansa-Asare bin tok say di suspended chief justice im attempt to stop di removal process as "unconstitutional." "Di move by di suspended CJ don dey undermine di constitution," wia im also bin accuse Justice Gertrude Torkornoo and her legal team say dem "dey try to scata lawful process." Im add say "president Mahama no breach any law for di process to remove di chief justice so far, so e go dey difficult for any pesin to stop di process." Oda sabi pipo bin tok say for di former attorney general, to be di lawyer for di chief justice don mean say wetin pipo tok say di former goment bin dey get favourable decisions for di Supreme Court wit di suspended chief justice, na true. Oga Kwaku Ansa -Asare also bin tok say "for di former attorney general Godfred Dame, to involve im serf for dis chief justice case, especially when im dey part of di process to appoint her in 2023, don dey make di mata worse." Oga Ansa-Asare tok local radio network JoyFM say di former attorney general im involvement for dis chief justice mata don dey create bad optics for di suspended CJ, especially as dem appoint her during di time im (Godfred Dame) be attorney general wia im be di former president Nana Akufo-Addo im legal advisor. But di former attorney general Godfred Dame respond say im decide to take up dis case sake of e dey in line wit im commitment to "upholding di rule of law." Im tok say dia legal mata for di Supreme Court na about "procedural irregularities" for di suspension process, e neva be about personal allegiance. Im tok say im action na to fight for di "independence of di kontris judiciary." "Time don reach say good men for dis kontri gatz to speak up for di right tin. One attorney general wia don stand up for di judiciary wia speak against attack on di judiciary, na me." Oga Godfred Dame add say "wetin dey happun be wrong, we gatz to correct am. Time don reach say we go do di proper tins for dis kontri. We no fit to let pipo mislead di public wia we neva go correct am." Di Supreme Court go soon hear di latest injunction application by di suspended chief justice. While dat dey go on; di 5-member panel already begin dia investigations wey dem dey hear from di CJ Justice Gertrude Torkornoo and di pipo wia bin file di separate petitions against her. Dem dey sit "behind closed doors" three times a week. Di goment say dem dey expect di panel to finish dia work soon, to settle dis mata once and for all, whether dem go find di suspended CJ guilty or not, na time to tell.
Malay Mail
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Anwar: Govt considering extending Tengku Maimun's tenure as chief justice
KUALA LUMPUR, May 22 — The government is considering extending the tenure of Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today. Tengku Maimun, the first woman to serve as the country's chief justice, is set to retire on June 30 upon reaching the mandatory retirement age of 66. When asked whether an extension would be granted to Tengku Maimun, Anwar briefly responded: 'Well, we are looking into it.' Anwar made the announcement after launching the Hadiah Bahasa 2025, which is making a comeback after 27 years at Hilton Kuala Lumpur, here, today. On Tuesday, Tengku Maimun reportedly said that she as well as the President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Federal Court judge Tan Sri Nallini Pathmanathan are still waiting on the offer for the extension of their tenure. Abang Iskandar is due to retire on July 1, while Nallini Pathmanathan is due to retire on Aug 21, as they have both reached the mandatory retirement age. Under Article 125(1) of the Federal Constitution, Federal Court judges may serve until age 66, with the possibility of a six-month extension subject to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's approval.
Malay Mail
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Anwar: Govt considering possibility of extending Tengku Maimun's tenure as chief justice
KUALA LUMPUR, May 22 — The government is considering the possibility of extending the tenure of Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today. Tengku Maimun, the first woman to serve as the country's chief justice, is set to retire on June 30 upon reaching the mandatory retirement age of 66. When asked whether an extension would be granted to Tengku Maimun, Anwar briefly responded: 'Well, we are looking into it.' Anwar made the announcement after launching the Hadiah Bahasa 2025, which is making a comeback after 27 years at Hilton Kuala Lumpur, here, today. On Tuesday, Tengku Maimun reportedly said that she as well as the President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Federal Court judge Tan Sri Nallini Pathmanathan are still waiting on the offer for the extension of their tenure. Abang Iskandar is due to retire on July 1, while Nallini Pathmanathan is due to retire on Aug 21, as they have both reached the mandatory retirement age. Under Article 125(1) of the Federal Constitution, Federal Court judges may serve until age 66, with the possibility of a six-month extension subject to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's approval.
CNA
15-05-2025
- CNA
Maid who stabbed 70-year-old woman 26 times gets murder conviction reduced on appeal
SINGAPORE: A maid serving a life sentence for murdering her employer's 70-year-old mother-in-law when she was 17 has successfully appealed against her conviction. Zin Mar Nwe, now 24, was originally found guilty of murder after a trial and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2023. On Wednesday (May 15), the Court of Appeal allowed her partial defence on the grounds of grave and sudden provocation. This meant her murder charge was reduced to one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon delivered the decision on behalf of a three-judge panel also comprising Justices Tay Yong Kwang and See Kee Oon. "Given the particular circumstances of this accused person, in particular her youth, the challenges of her indebtedness to her employment agent and her fear of being repatriated in these circumstances, we think a reasonable person situated as the accused person was could reasonably have been similarly provoked," he said. Parties will return to court at a later date to make submissions on the sentence. Culpable homicide is punishable with life imprisonment, or up to 20 years in prison with a fine. As Zin Mar Nwe is a woman, she cannot be caned. The maid, who is from Myanmar, stabbed the victim in June 2018 after the elderly woman threatened to send her back to her agent. The victim was watching television when Zin Mar Nwe knifed her 26 times until she stopped moving. The maid then retrieved her belongings, washed the knife and changed before fleeing. She was arrested at her employment agency. There is a gag order on the identities of the victim, her family members and the location of the incident. FINDINGS ON MAID ABUSE Grave and sudden provocation is one of the exceptions under which culpable homicide is not murder. Establishing this defence involves consideration of whether a person sharing similar characteristics with and in the same situation as the offender would be deprived of self-control by the provocation. To this end, the Court of Appeal considered the trial judge's findings on whether Zin Mar Nwe was abused by the victim prior to the killing. Chief Justice Menon said these findings went directly towards the defence of grave and sudden provocation. The trial judge, Justice Andre Maniam, had accepted that the victim hit the maid to get her attention or reprimand her, and that the victim also retaliated when the maid accidentally hurt her on certain occasions. In his judgment, he had said: "I do not believe that the accused would have stabbed the deceased if there were just an isolated statement by the deceased, on the day in question, that the accused would be sent back to the agent. "Rather, that statement was made after a period in which the deceased had scolded, hit, and hurt the accused. He had continued: "But for the threat to send the accused back to the agent, however, the accused would not have stabbed the deceased." Justice Maniam had also accepted that the maid did not report the victim's treatment of her to the rest of the family, and it seemed she was "willing to tolerate such treatment, although she was hurt, sad, and felt unappreciated". "The accused however feared being sent back to the agent (and consequently back to her home country in debt), and when the deceased threatened to do so, that triggered the stabbing." He had further noted that Zin Mar Nwe had told the police she was "very angry" when the victim said those words to her. PARTIES' ARGUMENTS Zin Mar Nwe's appeal was fought by lawyers Josephus Tan and Cory Wong Guo Yean of Invictus Law, who represented her under the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme. Mr Tan argued that the "ingredients" of grave and sudden provocation were already present in the trial and should have been considered by the trial judge. These included the evidence that the maid gave about being abused, her mounting debt with her employment agency and the threat of being sent back to her agency. He also pointed to her young age and the fact that she had already been rejected by two employers since arriving in Singapore in January 2018, which were part of her characteristics and situation at the time. The provocation posed by the victim's threat to send Zin Mar Nwe back to her agency the next day took place against this backdrop, the maid's lawyers argued. It "struck directly at the heart of her dire employment predicament in Singapore", they said in written submissions. "And at the tender age of 17, we suggest that (Zin Mar Nwe) would reasonably not have the appropriate coping mechanisms to deal with or to attenuate the gravity of the provocation," they added. Deputy Public Prosecutors Kumaresan Gohulabalan, Sean Teh and Brian Tan argued that a defence of grave and sudden provocation was not supported by the evidence. Mr Kumaresan argued that the trial judge was wrong to find that the victim had verbally or physically abused Zin Mar Nwe as this was based solely on evidence given by the maid, who was not a credible witness. He pointed out that she never reported the abuse to the rest of the family despite them having a good relationship with her, and did not write about it in her diary even though she candidly recorded her feelings there. The prosecutors also pointed to "radically inconsistent" versions of events that the maid gave, such as an account she gave of two "dark-skinned" men killing the victim before she admitted to the stabbing. However, the Court of Appeal found that Justice Maniam's findings were supported by the weight of evidence, and clearly established the subjective element of the gravity of the provocation. He said the court did not read those findings as extending to acts of alleged abuse that occurred before the day of the killing itself. Chief Justice Menon also noted the "heinous" nature of the knife attack and the absence of a motive for the killing. During the appeal, the prosecution had also acknowledged the trial judge's "troubles" in establishing motive. Addressing the maid's credibility, Chief Justice Menon acknowledged that Zin Mar Nwe initially came up with a false account of how the victim was killed. However, four days after the killing, she gave a "nuanced" account of what had happened – an altercation with the victim and a threat of being sent back to her agent – and the effect this had on her. He said it was "implausible" that she made this up to defend herself when it was not being advanced in her defence until now, and that her account was essentially consistent throughout her trial.
CNA
14-05-2025
- CNA
Maid who stabbed 70-year-old woman 26 times gets murder charge reduced on appeal
SINGAPORE: A maid serving a life sentence for murdering her employer's 70-year-old mother-in-law when she was 17 has successfully appealed against her conviction. Zin Mar Nwe, now 24, was originally found guilty of murder after a trial and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2023. On Wednesday (May 15), the Court of Appeal allowed her partial defence on the grounds of grave and sudden provocation. This meant her murder charge was reduced to one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon delivered the decision on behalf of a three-judge panel also comprising Justices Tay Yong Kwang and See Kee Oon. "Given the particular circumstances of this accused person, in particular her youth, the challenges of her indebtedness to her employment agent and her fear of being repatriated in these circumstances, we think a reasonable person situated as the accused person was could reasonably have been similarly provoked," he said. Parties will return to court at a later date to make submissions on the sentence. Culpable homicide is punishable with life imprisonment, or up to 20 years in prison with a fine. As Zin Mar Nwe is a woman, she cannot be caned. The maid, who is from Myanmar, stabbed the victim in June 2018 after the elderly woman threatened to send her back to her agent. The victim was watching television when Zin Mar Nwe knifed her 26 times until she stopped moving. The maid then retrieved her belongings, washed the knife and changed before fleeing. She was arrested at her employment agency. There is a gag order on the identities of the victim, her family members and the location of the incident. FINDINGS ON MAID ABUSE Grave and sudden provocation is one of the exceptions under which culpable homicide is not murder. Establishing this defence involves consideration of whether a person sharing similar characteristics with and in the same situation as the offender would be deprived of self-control by the provocation. To this end, the Court of Appeal considered the trial judge's findings on whether Zin Mar Nwe was abused by the victim prior to the killing. Chief Justice Menon said these findings went directly towards the defence of grave and sudden provocation. The trial judge, Justice Andre Maniam, had accepted that the victim hit the maid to get her attention or reprimand her, and that the victim also retaliated when the maid accidentally hurt her on certain occasions. In his judgment, he had said: "I do not believe that the accused would have stabbed the deceased if there were just an isolated statement by the deceased, on the day in question, that the accused would be sent back to the agent. "Rather, that statement was made after a period in which the deceased had scolded, hit, and hurt the accused. He had continued: "But for the threat to send the accused back to the agent, however, the accused would not have stabbed the deceased." Justice Maniam had also accepted that the maid did not report the victim's treatment of her to the rest of the family, and it seemed she was "willing to tolerate such treatment, although she was hurt, sad, and felt unappreciated". "The accused however feared being sent back to the agent (and consequently back to her home country in debt), and when the deceased threatened to do so, that triggered the stabbing." He had further noted that Zin Mar Nwe had told the police she was "very angry" when the victim said those words to her. PARTIES' ARGUMENTS Zin Mar Nwe's appeal was fought by lawyers Josephus Tan and Cory Wong Guo Yean of Invictus Law, who represented her under the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme. Mr Tan argued that the "ingredients" of grave and sudden provocation were already present in the trial and should have been considered by the trial judge. These included the evidence that the maid gave about being abused, her mounting debt with her employment agency and the threat of being sent back to her agency. He also pointed to her young age and the fact that she had already been rejected by two employers since arriving in Singapore in January 2018, which were part of her characteristics and situation at the time. The provocation posed by the victim's threat to send Zin Mar Nwe back to her agency the next day took place against this backdrop, the maid's lawyers argued. It "struck directly at the heart of her dire employment predicament in Singapore", they said in written submissions. "And at the tender age of 17, we suggest that (Zin Mar Nwe) would reasonably not have the appropriate coping mechanisms to deal with or to attenuate the gravity of the provocation," they added. Deputy Public Prosecutors Kumaresan Gohulabalan, Sean Teh and Brian Tan argued that a defence of grave and sudden provocation was not supported by the evidence. Mr Kumaresan argued that the trial judge was wrong to find that the victim had verbally or physically abused Zin Mar Nwe as this was based solely on evidence given by the maid, who was not a credible witness. He pointed out that she never reported the abuse to the rest of the family despite them having a good relationship with her, and did not write about it in her diary even though she candidly recorded her feelings there. The prosecutors also pointed to "radically inconsistent" versions of events that the maid gave, such as an account she gave of two "dark-skinned" men killing the victim before she admitted to the stabbing. However, the Court of Appeal found that Justice Maniam's findings were supported by the weight of evidence, and clearly established the subjective element of the gravity of the provocation. He said the court did not read those findings as extending to acts of alleged abuse that occurred before the day of the killing itself. Chief Justice Menon also noted the "heinous" nature of the knife attack and the absence of a motive for the killing. During the appeal, the prosecution had also acknowledged the trial judge's "troubles" in establishing motive. Addressing the maid's credibility, Chief Justice Menon acknowledged that Zin Mar Nwe initially came up with a false account of how the victim was killed. However, four days after the killing, she gave a "nuanced" account of what had happened – an altercation with the victim and a threat of being sent back to her agent – and the effect this had on her. He said it was "implausible" that she made this up to defend herself when it was not being advanced in her defence until now, and that her account was essentially consistent throughout her trial.
