Latest news with #ShafeeAbdullah
Malay Mail
5 hours ago
- General
- Malay Mail
Are we intolerant of criticisms? — Hafiz Hassan
JUNE 2 — On the same day (May 30) the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) announced that it would pursue contempt of court proceedings against senior lawyer Shafee Abdullah, the Supreme Court of India (SCI) heard contempt proceedings against YouTuber Ajay Shukla for airing scandalous allegations against a senior Supreme Court judge. The SCI had taken suo moto cognisance of the issue the day before. Suo moto is Latin for 'on its own motion'. So, it was the SCI who initiated the contempt proceedings, not the Attorney-General of India. Shukla is the editor-in-chief of a digital channel. In a recent video, he allegedly made remarks about a Supreme Court judge. The SCI considered the remarks 'scandalous allegations widely published on YouTube [which] are likely to bring disrepute to the august institution of judiciary.' During the contempt proceedings before a bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justices A.G. Masih and A.S. Chandurkar, the SCI observed that while the Indian Constitution guarantees free speech, it is subject to reasonable restrictions. Lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah speaks during a press conference at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya on January 6, 2025. — Picture by Firdaus Latif A person cannot make contemptuous allegations defaming a judge of the Supreme Court under the guise of free speech. It is detrimental to the judiciary. Now, if contempt proceedings are taken against Shafee for his 'Nazi Germany' remarks, are we being intolerant of criticisms? What say you? * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Malay Mail
a day ago
- General
- Malay Mail
When comments are vulgar, humiliating, inappropriate, disrespectful and offensive, they are contemptuous — Hafiz Hassan
JUNE 1 — The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) announced on Friday (May 30) that it would pursue contempt of court proceedings against senior lawyer Shafee Abdullah, over his 'Nazi Germany' reference regarding ex-prime minister Najib Abdul Razak's royal addendum case. In its statement, the AGC said Shafee's remark was made in the context of an ongoing case, and 'constitutes a serious and unwarranted attack' on the dignity, authority and independence of the Judiciary. Is there a legal basis for contempt of court proceedings against Shafee? Let's recall the case of Peguam Negara Malaysia v Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd [2021]. The facts in that case are straightforward. Malaysiakini published an article on June 9, 2020 about the acquittal of former Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman of 46 charges of corruption and money laundering. Coincidentally on the same day, the Office of the Chief Registrar issued a press release by the Chief Justice for all courts to be fully operational from July 1, 2020, in line with the announcement that the country was moving into the recovery phase of the Movement Control Order (MCO). Malaysiakini republished from Bernama that press release as an article. Following that press release, a number of comments (impugned comments) by third party online subscribers appeared on Malaysiakini's website on the same day. A week after, the Attorney General by way of an ex parte notice of motion applied for leave to commence committal proceedings against the publisher of Malaysiakini as the first respondent and its editor in chief as the second respondent for publishing the impugned comments. The rest, as they say it, is history. By a majority (2:1), the Federal Court found the first respondent, but not the second respondent, guilty of contempt of court. Lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has made a "Nazi Germany" remark against the government. — Picture by Hari Anggara. Contempt of court is a generic term descriptive of conduct which tends to undermine proceedings in a court of law and can take many forms. The law on contempt is not to protect the dignity of individual judges but to protect the administration of justice. The courts cannot permit any interference with the due administration of justice. Its purpose is to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice. Accordingly, criticisms of judges as individuals, rather than as judges, are not the subject of contempt. In Malaysiakini's case the impugned comments, which need not be repeated here, were beyond doubt contemptuous in nature. The respondents themselves admitted that the comments were indeed offensive, inappropriate, disrespectful and contemptuous. Both duly regretted their publication and put it on record that they did not condone them. When comments are vulgar, humiliating and offensive, they go beyond justified criticisms and amount to simple insults. No one in the right frame of mind can say that such comments are done in exercise of freedom of expression and therefore protected. A day after his Nazi Germany reference, Shafee, through his legal firm, clarified the remarks. If the AGC indeed pursues proceedings against him, the senior lawyer will have his day in court. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Free Malaysia Today
3 days ago
- General
- Free Malaysia Today
AGC to cite Shafee for contempt after ‘Nazi-Germany hearing' jibe
Lawyer Shafee Abdullah said today that the remark was intended to educate the public during an exchange with a reporter, and not to undermine the judiciary. PETALING JAYA : The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) says it will apply to commence committal proceedings against Shafee Abdullah after the lawyer described court proceedings as being like 'a Nazi-Germany kind of hearing'. In a statement, the AGC said the remark made by Najib Razak's lawyer concerned an ongoing case and was a 'serious and unnecessary attack' on the judiciary. 'Although lawyers have the right to challenge the decision of judges through the available legal channels, public statements that tarnish the image of the courts or threaten public confidence in the administration of justice are unacceptable,' it said. 'We will seek contempt of court proceedings to ensure the rule of law, preserve the integrity of the judicial process and protect the court from unnecessary accusations and public pressure.' Yesterday, Malaysiakini reported Shafee's criticism of a court order to temporarily stop all proceedings linked to Najib's royal addendum, where he compared the decision to 'a Nazi-Germany kind of hearing'. Earlier today, the portal quoted Shafee as saying that the remark was intended to educate the public during an exchange with a reporter, and not to undermine the judiciary. He also said the remark was made solely in the context of explaining the meaning and essence of a 'judicial decision'. Najib had obtained leave from the Court of Appeal to begin judicial review proceedings to enforce a royal decree so as to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest. However, proceedings have been suspended pending the disposal of the attorney-general's appeal to the Federal Court. The Federal Territories Pardons Board announced on Feb 2 last year that Najib's prison sentence in his SRC International case had been halved from 12 years to six, and his fine reduced from RM210 million to RM50 million.
Free Malaysia Today
3 days ago
- General
- Free Malaysia Today
Shafee claims 7 letters sent to confirm Najib's addendum
Lawyer Shafee Abdullah said if no such addendum existed, there was no harm in replying his letters to that effect. KUALA LUMPUR : Lawyer Shafee Abdullah today claimed he had sent at least seven letters to individuals and institutions seeking to confirm the existence of the addendum in relation to former prime minister Najib Razak. He said none of the parties responded to his letters or acknowledged their receipt. 'We sent letters to former attorney-general Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh, the home minister (Saifuddin Nasution Ismail), the law and institutional reform minister (Azalina Othman Said), the prisons commissioner-general, and the government, and CC'd the prime minister and his deputy,' he said at a press conference today. He said if no such addendum existed, there was no harm in replying his letters to that effect. Najib obtained leave from the Court of Appeal to begin judicial review proceedings to enforce a royal decree so as to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest. However, proceedings have been suspended pending the disposal of the current attorney-general's appeal to the Federal Court. The Federal Territories Pardons Board announced on Feb 2 last year that Najib's prison sentence in his SRC International case had been halved from 12 years to six, and his fine reduced from RM210 million to RM50 million. On May 21, Najib filed an application to initiate contempt proceedings against Terrirudin. He claimed that Terrirudin, while serving as attorney-general, failed to reveal the former king's royal addendum allowing Najib to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest. However, the Attorney-General's Chambers said Najib's action was a direct breach of a court order regarding his judicial review and claims that Terrirudin tried to 'mislead' the court on the addendum had no basis. Shafee said that when a judicial review is filed, it is compulsory for the summoned party to be honest about their explanation and any document they have in hand. 'They cannot play hide-and-seek,' he said.
Malaysiakini
3 days ago
- Politics
- Malaysiakini
Shafee clarifies 'Nazi-Germany' remark
Lawyer Shafee Abdullah has issued a statement clarifying his 'Nazi-Germany' comment made yesterday, in a press conference outside the Kuala Lumpur High Court. In a statement issued by his law firm, Shafee and Co, his legal team explained that Shafee's remark was made during an exchange with a journalist.
