First thing though, the court verdicts that are covered in this discussion does not cover general homicide cases or those general criminal breach of trusts, frauds and etc.. The scope I am referring to is about cases that are mainly government vs public related. Lately, there have been a few cases that popped out like Anwar Sodomy II or the Nizar vs Zambry cases that the purpose of the case has no longer become real justice, based on the rule of law. Instead many 'politikus', politicians from the Barisan Nasional coaltion, UMNO in particular is indeed seeing it more or less as their hegemony in Malaysian politics on the believe that they are the ones to rule Malaysia for all time.
First thing was to go back to cases related to the Perak constituitional crisis. First of all, the court in Perak has stood by the Election Commission not to acknowledge ex-speaker Sivakumar's letters that the three rogue-assemblymen had resigned. Then, a few months later, in May, the Appeal court overturned the High Court's decision to declare Nizar as the legitimate Menteri Besar of Perak. Of course, every one knows that there are hidden hands in terms of manipulating the case into the government favor.
The genesis of manipulation originated in the 80s (at that time, Salleh Abbas was the Lord President) where there have been many court verdicts in cases of government vs public were delivered in the favor of the public. That means, the losing streak at that time was very unbearable until to the point the entity was to be interfered. Post Salleh's sacking, the score became swinging to the other side. Initially, it's more or less even up the playing field, but eventually, it gradually became to the point where cases such as this will thought as political power between government vs public as part of its hegemony to remain dominant.
Until today, the myth that surrounds UMNO, since, it still says that they protect the Malay rights, and they are still saying that they are the only party with their Barisan partners to run Malaysia Incorporated. Thus if any verdict delivered goes against the government, the first thing that goes would be that hardcore men would say 'hilang kuasa' or 'Malay rights diminishing' or something. Therefore, if the Federal courts in particular said that what the Court of Appeal's decision is wrong or the Election Commission was wrong (as also of the Kota Seputeh) case, then UMNO and their NGOs under their patronage will start screaming of things that are nonsense. Of course, what they took illegally (think pirate style) - they would not want to relinquish it easily since they claim to do it legally, frog style.
Why would the EC turn away notifications of resignation from the Kedah and Perak speakers? Simple: Najib has instructed a lawyer in UMNO to tell them not to do so.
Why does the Court of Appeal overturn the High Court in Nizar vs Zambry and why the court would agree to Zambry's stay of appeal?
Simple: Najib has relayed an instruction to judges via the Chief Justice to give UMNO the win, irregardless of the score. So the outcome was a 3-0 of govt against public / opposition. A loss in that means 'loss of power' back there.
"Giving UMNO the win" - that's the magic phrase that I got reminded. Last week, I was told from an SMS relayed from Datuk Nizar that although hearings have been concluded, the chances of overturning the appeal are slim. Given of a 5-man quorum, I'd say it's a 4-1 rejection of the appeal, particularly with UMNO wants to keep the state. Of course, this contradicts in the Gobind appeal where it's true that a Speaker's decision cannot be challenged but numeration will still have to be allowed. Contradiction isn't it? And more political oriented.
You do not need to refer to previous cases to make sense of the opinion I want to pen here. You need inferences and common sense as well as the current party trend here. Trial verdicts are somewhat already decided from the beginning for political reasons but behind the mask that is the law. You let things go within the proper framework, but outcome is rigged to their favor. Failure to comply would result in putting in cold storage or being transferred elsewhere. The line of reality has started get blurred with real justice no longer done and those white-collar criminals (with those in the corridors of power in particular) walking away scott-free. And of course, rigging trials is also a tool of an economic-hitman so who is actually selling the country out to imperialism?
First thing was to go back to cases related to the Perak constituitional crisis. First of all, the court in Perak has stood by the Election Commission not to acknowledge ex-speaker Sivakumar's letters that the three rogue-assemblymen had resigned. Then, a few months later, in May, the Appeal court overturned the High Court's decision to declare Nizar as the legitimate Menteri Besar of Perak. Of course, every one knows that there are hidden hands in terms of manipulating the case into the government favor.
The genesis of manipulation originated in the 80s (at that time, Salleh Abbas was the Lord President) where there have been many court verdicts in cases of government vs public were delivered in the favor of the public. That means, the losing streak at that time was very unbearable until to the point the entity was to be interfered. Post Salleh's sacking, the score became swinging to the other side. Initially, it's more or less even up the playing field, but eventually, it gradually became to the point where cases such as this will thought as political power between government vs public as part of its hegemony to remain dominant.
Until today, the myth that surrounds UMNO, since, it still says that they protect the Malay rights, and they are still saying that they are the only party with their Barisan partners to run Malaysia Incorporated. Thus if any verdict delivered goes against the government, the first thing that goes would be that hardcore men would say 'hilang kuasa' or 'Malay rights diminishing' or something. Therefore, if the Federal courts in particular said that what the Court of Appeal's decision is wrong or the Election Commission was wrong (as also of the Kota Seputeh) case, then UMNO and their NGOs under their patronage will start screaming of things that are nonsense. Of course, what they took illegally (think pirate style) - they would not want to relinquish it easily since they claim to do it legally, frog style.
Why would the EC turn away notifications of resignation from the Kedah and Perak speakers? Simple: Najib has instructed a lawyer in UMNO to tell them not to do so.
Why does the Court of Appeal overturn the High Court in Nizar vs Zambry and why the court would agree to Zambry's stay of appeal?
Simple: Najib has relayed an instruction to judges via the Chief Justice to give UMNO the win, irregardless of the score. So the outcome was a 3-0 of govt against public / opposition. A loss in that means 'loss of power' back there.
"Giving UMNO the win" - that's the magic phrase that I got reminded. Last week, I was told from an SMS relayed from Datuk Nizar that although hearings have been concluded, the chances of overturning the appeal are slim. Given of a 5-man quorum, I'd say it's a 4-1 rejection of the appeal, particularly with UMNO wants to keep the state. Of course, this contradicts in the Gobind appeal where it's true that a Speaker's decision cannot be challenged but numeration will still have to be allowed. Contradiction isn't it? And more political oriented.
You do not need to refer to previous cases to make sense of the opinion I want to pen here. You need inferences and common sense as well as the current party trend here. Trial verdicts are somewhat already decided from the beginning for political reasons but behind the mask that is the law. You let things go within the proper framework, but outcome is rigged to their favor. Failure to comply would result in putting in cold storage or being transferred elsewhere. The line of reality has started get blurred with real justice no longer done and those white-collar criminals (with those in the corridors of power in particular) walking away scott-free. And of course, rigging trials is also a tool of an economic-hitman so who is actually selling the country out to imperialism?
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are welcome to post in any comments that do not trouble readers of the blog.
Providing an ID is recommended. If some reason you wish to use an Anonymous name, please leave a name below your comments. From now on, comments with no names will not be considered for moderation.