Latest news with #contemptofcourt
Malay Mail
3 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.
Malay Mail
3 days ago
- General
- Malay Mail
AGC to seek contempt proceedings against Shafee for ‘Nazi-Germany' court remark
PETALING JAYA, May 30 — The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has announced plans to initiate contempt of court proceedings against Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah over his controversial remark likening court proceedings to a 'Nazi-Germany kind of hearing.' In a statement, the AGC said Shafee's comment, made in reference to an ongoing case, constituted a 'serious and unnecessary attack' on the judiciary. 'While lawyers have the right to challenge judicial decisions through legal channels, public statements that undermine the courts or erode public confidence in the justice system are unacceptable,' it said. The AGC said it would proceed with contempt of court applications to uphold the rule of law, protect the integrity of the judiciary, and safeguard the courts from baseless accusations and undue public pressure. Shafee, who represents former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, reportedly made the remark in response to a court order temporarily suspending proceedings linked to Najib's judicial review to enforce a royal decree for house arrest. Yesterday, Malaysiakini quoted Shafee comparing the court's decision to a 'Nazi-Germany kind of hearing.' In a follow-up statement today, Shafee clarified that his remark was meant to educate the public during an exchange with a reporter, rather than to disparage the judiciary. He said the comment was intended to explain the concept and essence of a 'judicial decision.' Najib had earlier been granted leave by the Court of Appeal to initiate judicial review proceedings to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest. However, these proceedings are on hold pending the Federal Court's decision on an appeal by the Attorney-General. In February last year, the Federal Territories Pardons Board announced that Najib's prison sentence for the SRC International case had been reduced from 12 years to six, with his fine lowered from RM210 million to RM50 million. The AGC's move comes amid ongoing scrutiny of public commentary related to judicial matters, reinforcing its stance on preserving confidence in Malaysia's legal system.
Free Malaysia Today
3 days ago
- General
- Free Malaysia Today
Punish Isham with jail, fine for attacks on judges, court told
Ex-Umno Supreme Council member Isham Jalil faces contempt of court proceedings over comments about the judiciary made during an interview published on Facebook on Sept 30, 2023. (Bernama pic) KUALA LUMPUR : The prosecution has called for former Umno Supreme Council member Isham Jalil to be punished severely for his comments on judges in ex-prime minister Najib Razak's various 1MDB-related cases, saying the statements he made were unfair and scandalous. Deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Mustaffa P Kunyalam told the High Court that the contents of Isham's interview – published on social media on Sept 30, 2023 – risked undermining public confidence in the administration of justice. 'We want this court to impose a fine or jail (sentence) or both, as the contemnor (Isham) has failed to purge the contempt,' he said in submissions before Justice K Muniandy. Last year, the attorney-general rejected representations lodged on Isham's behalf seeking that he be allowed to offer an unreserved apology in exchange for the proceedings coming to an end. Mustaffa, who was assisted by DPP T Deepa Nair, said Isham had launched scurrilous attacks on trial judges Nazlan Ghazali, Collin Lawrence Sequerah and a Federal Court bench chaired by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat. 'The actions mentioned above constitute interference in the administration of justice,' he added. Filed on Dec 28, 2023, the application concerned statements Isham allegedly made during an interview titled 'Townhall for justice: Keadilan sebenarnya untuk siapa? (Who is justice for?)'. The interview was published on Facebook on Sept 30, 2023 via an account known as Malaya Post. In an affidavit filed in support of the leave application, Mustaffa claimed Isham had during the interview commented on Najib's 1MDB and SRC International trials, and the Federal Court's conduct of the final appeal in the latter case. Isham is also alleged to have accused Sequerah and Nazlan, who presided over the 1MDB and SRC International trials, respectively, of bias. He allegedly said the judges ought to have withdrawn from hearing the cases. Both judges now sit in the Court of Appeal. According to Mustaffa, Isham also claimed that the five apex court judges, led by Tengku Maimun, who heard Najib's final appeal in the SRC International case, had judged the case unfairly. Lawyer Azhar Azizan Harun, appearing for Isham, said the prosecution had failed to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt as there was a material contradiction between the attorney-general's affidavit and statements made by a Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officer and a court deputy registrar. He said the dignity of judges no longer needs protection, unlike in medieval England when judges were representatives of the king. 'In the present democratic system, the people are the king,' he said, adding that the offence of scandalising the court is to protect against interference in the administration of justice. He said in the modern UK, no contempt proceedings were initiated even when the media had criticised judges. Azhar, who was assisted by Jamie Wong, said Isham's action did not create chaos in society. 'The people did not demonstrate to express they were unhappy with the SRC verdict, nor did anyone throw shoes at judges,' he said, adding that the judges had to be resilient in accepting criticism from public-spirited individuals. 'We now live in a social media age where everyone wants to be a star of their own show. Gone are the days when one had to be invited by RTM for an interview,' he added. Azhar said what Isham had uttered outside the courtroom was a repeat of what lawyers for Najib had said in court, albeit in temperate language. He said Malaysia should adopt the UK's approach of finding that contempt is no longer a species of scandalising the court. 'Freedom of speech as guaranteed under the Federal Constitution should be given priority,' he added. Muniandy will deliver his ruling on July 1.
