Latest news with #SalimBashir
New Straits Times
15-07-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Former Bar president calls to amend JAC Act to give 'meaningful interpretation'
KUALA LUMPUR: The government should amend the Constitution to give the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) Act 2009 greater legal weight in the appointment of judges, says former Malaysian Bar Council president Salim Bashir. He said while the JAC Act 2009 had set out the procedural framework for judicial selections and recommendations, it should be given a "meaningful interpretation". "JAC Act 2009 is a federal law enacted under legislative power by virtue of Article 132(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution. "Though it sets out a procedural framework for selections of judges and recommendations, it should be given a meaningful interpretation that its existence is to complement the constitutional discretion bestowed under Article 122B(1) to the prime minister for recommendations and His Majesty for the appointment of judges. "Otherwise, it will certainly render the law redundant, repugnant to its objective and stamp absurdity to the working of rule of law and independence of judiciary," he said. Yesterday, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said that the JAC Act was not a binding provision in the appointment of judges. She said that such appointments were ultimately governed by Article 122B of the Federal Constitution, which empowered the prime minister to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers. She added that the JAC's role was to screen, assess and recommend names of judicial candidates, but its recommendations were not final or binding. Salim said if the government believes that the JAC Act did not provide any binding effect on the appointment of judges, then it should move to amend the Constitution. "Her (Azalina) statement has given impetus for legislative changes, and the government should consider amending the Constitution to give effect to the JAC Act on the appointment of judges. I am sure legislative members will render their support." Meanwhile, criminal lawyer Datuk Geethan Ram Vincent agreed with Azalina's constitutional interpretation, but cautioned against overlooking the JAC's intended role. "Yes, this is correct. Under Article 122B of the Federal Constitution, the prime minister retains full authority to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on judicial appointments. The JAC can recommend, but not decide. "Despite lacking binding authority, the JAC serves important functions. It provides professional vetting of candidates, ensures some degree of transparency in appointments and maintains records of the selection process. "Even though its recommendations are not binding, the JAC acts as an important institutional check against arbitrary or political appointments." Geethan said the JAC's primary task was to review potential judges based on their experience, skills and professional conduct. "They interview candidates and then suggest names to the prime minister. Although the JAC thoroughly documents the selection process, it has no authority to compel the prime minister to accept its recommendations or to require any explanation if they are disregarded. "In essence, the JAC handles the groundwork but holds no real influence over whether its suggestions are acted upon." He added that while Azalina's remarks were technically accurate, they failed to address the broader issue of judicial independence. "While Azalina's remarks are technically accurate regarding the constitutional framework, they overlook the original intent behind creating the JAC to reduce political influence in judicial appointments. "Her statement reflects the current legal reality but fails to address whether this system adequately protects."
New Straits Times
01-07-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Bar lauds Federal Court decision on Peceaful Assembly Act provision
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian Bar welcomed the Federal Court's declaration today that Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 was unconstitutional. Its president, Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab, said the provision, which criminalises failure to provide prior notice to the police before holding an assembly, has long been the subject of concern within the legal and civil society communities. He said the Malaysian Bar had consistently opposed criminalisation of peaceful assemblies due to procedural irregularities. "We have held that the requirement to notify the police should be administrative in nature, not punitive. "This decision vindicates that position. Criminal sanctions for failure to notify authorities are not only excessive but have had a chilling effect on public participation and freedom of expression," he told the New Straits Times. Meanwhile, former Bar president Salim Bashir called the ruling "groundbreaking and progressive". He said the Federal Court characterised the notice requirements as prohibitory rather than restrictive. Restrictions which are necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the federation or any part of the federation or public order are allowed under Article 10(2)(b) of the Federal Constitution, he said. Earlier today, the apex court declared it unconstitutional to criminalise the failure to notify the police five days in advance before holding a peaceful assembly. Delivering the unanimous decision by a five-member bench, Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 imposes a penalty that goes beyond what is allowed under Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of speech, assembly and association.
New Straits Times
29-06-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
MACC faces legal hurdles in global asset freeze pursuit
KUALA LUMPUR: While Malaysian authorities have the legal power to freeze suspected illicit assets through court-issued restraining orders, enforcing those orders abroad is more complex, often requiring separate legal applications in foreign jurisdictions. A legal expert believes the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) may face an uphill battle in its ongoing efforts to trace high-value assets allegedly linked to the late Tun Daim Zainuddin, his family members, and proxies. The challenge lies in cross-border legal procedures, which may require the commission to either file separate court applications in the respective countries or rely on formal mutual legal assistance (MLA) agreements to take action. Former Malaysian Bar Council president Salim Bashir said such restraining orders, issued under Section 44 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLA), were typically the first step in freezing assets suspected of being linked to criminal activities. "A Malaysian court order allows enforcement agencies to request mutual legal assistance from the Attorney General's office of foreign countries, where the assets are located, to trace and enforce the order," he told the New Sunday Times. However, he said not all foreign jurisdictions accepedt Malaysian court orders automatically. "Some countries require a separate application to register the local order before any action can be taken," he said. He added that the feasibility of enforcement depended on the country's legal requirements and whether Malaysia had existing mutual legal assistance (MLA) arrangements with the jurisdiction involved. Salim said that although AMLA gave enforcement agencies and the public prosecutor broad powers, they must still convince the court that the assets were tied to unlawful activities. "The standard is based on the balance of probabilities. There must be cogent evidence, and it must be proven to be credible enough to satisfy the court on the need for a forfeiture order against the assets of an individual." He added that any attempt to seize assets — whether local or foreign — must also comply with Article 13 of the Federal Constitution, which prohibits individuals from being deprived of their property except in accordance with the law. Earlier, it was reported that MACC was now expanding its investigation to five additional countries as it tracked down high-value assets linked to Daim, a former finance minister.
Free Malaysia Today
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Free Malaysia Today
Separate AG, PP roles now to avoid loss of public confidence, govt told
The government says it is still studying a proposal to divest the attorney-general of his role as public prosecutor. PETALING JAYA : Lawyers want Putrajaya to act quickly to divest the attorney-general (AG) of his prosecutorial role, saying any further delay will only deepen public perception that the government lacks the political will to carry out promised reforms. They said the desired change—one that is crucial for the Malaysian justice system— has been talked about for many years, but remains elusive. Salim Bashir. Lawyer Salim Bashir said the current administration, led by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, must 'walk its talk' following vigorous feasibility studies conducted both locally and abroad by a government task force over the past two years. The public expects the government to expedite the process, he said. 'Enough consultations and studies have been made. The separation must be done urgently to bolster public confidence,' said Salim, a former Malaysian Bar president. The lawyer was commenting after law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said said last week that the government was still in the midst of studying the matter. Azalina expressed hope that a decision can be reached before the next general election. Last December, Anwar told the media that a draft Cabinet paper on the subject is expected to be ready by the middle of this year. Acknowledging the complexity of the issue, Anwar said the paper may take time to complete as it involves numerous amendments to the law, including the Federal Constitution. Pakatan Harapan had, in its election manifesto in 2018, pledged to put the change into effect, a promise it repeated at the 15th general election four years later. Barisan Nasional followed suit, saying in 2022 that it was necessary to eliminate any conflict of interest and reduce excessive power placed in the hands of the AG. Haniff Khatri Abdulla. Both PH and BN are now part of the unity government. Once separated, all prosecutorial powers will be vested in the public prosecutor, while the AG will act as the government's legal advisor. Lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla chastised Azalina for the delay. 'We will not move forward if the government does not put in the political effort to attend to it.' Hanif proposed that a royal committee, under the auspices of the Conference of Rulers, be formed to study the separation of roles. Lawyer Rafique Rashid Ali said there will be occasions when the AG may not be in the best position to deal with a criminal matter himself. 'He may find himself in a position of conflict of interest from time to time, when the interest of his client—the government—may not fully coincide with public interest,' he said. Rafique said experience has shown that such situations tend to arise when politicians are prosecuted for criminal offences. Rafique Rashid Ali. He said that, since 2018, politicians aligned to the government of the day had their charges withdrawn while their trials were ongoing. In certain other cases, the prosecution's appeals against acquittals were struck out on flimsy grounds such as the petition of appeal being filed out of time, he added. 'Most of these corruption charges involve millions of ringgit, and the optics are that a pliant AG is appointed to execute the agenda of those in power, ' said Rafique, adding that precious judicial and prosecutorial time and resources are wasted in the process.
New Straits Times
16-05-2025
- New Straits Times
FRU crash: Nine reckless, dangerous driving charges causing death, align with legal principles
KUALA LUMPUR: The nine charges against a lorry driver involved in Tuesday's crash that killed nine Federal Reserve Unit (FRU) men are in line with legal principles, said legal experts. Former Malaysian Bar Council president Salim Bashir said charging the driver with nine counts of reckless or dangerous driving causing death was in accordance with Section 163 of the Criminal Procedure Code. "This ensures that the accused is not prejudiced by the legal process The law stipulates that every distinct offence must be addressed in a separate charge and tried independently," he said. "Distinct offences are defined as separate acts committed against different victims, even if they fall under the same legal provision," he said. Salim, a senior criminal lawyer, added that such charges were a standard practice to ensure accused were adequately informed of the allegations against them. "The accused must be clearly notified of each alleged offence, with sufficient time to prepare a defence," he said. "In cases involving multiple fatalities, it is crucial to specify the names of the victims, as well as the dates and times of the alleged offences," he said. Earlier today, the lorry driver, Rudi Zulkarnian Mat Radi, 45, was charged in the Sessions Court with nine counts of dangerous driving causing death. He pleaded not guilty to all charges framed under Section 41(1) of the Road Transport Act 1987. The alleged offences stem from the crash at Km15, Jalan Sungai Manik, in Hilir Perak at around 9.05am on May 13. Criminal lawyer Datuk Geethan Ram Vincent also said the charges aligned with the law and were not unusual. "The public prosecutor has the discretion to frame the charges as nine separate counts or as a single charge listing all victims," he said. "While the offences occurred as part of the same incident, the law permits separate charges for each victim to ensure clarity in prosecution," Geethan added. He said the court would consider the fact that the offences occurred in a single transaction during sentencing. "If convicted, the court may impose imprisonment sentences to run concurrently, but the fines will be treated as separate," he said.
