CJ disrespecting Bar by attempt to censor speech

0


YOURSAY | ‘Azalina should comment on why the judiciary does not want the Bar to speak.’

Azalina: Unprofessional of Bar not to attend Legal Year event

Anonymous 278451459939581: Chief Justice Md Raus Sharif unilaterally took the decision to disallow the Bar Council president to speak at the Legal Year event, as he intended to bring up the matter of the illegal appointments.

This is not an action that will heap praise on the CJ. So, who is acting unprofessionally here? No wonder, no one has faith or respect for our judiciary.

Quigonbond: Indeed, how is boycotting the Legal Year opening because the judges cannot withstand criticism considered unprofessional?

The Bar held a meeting and passed a resolution to challenge the extension of the CJ. There is, as such, no personal agenda.

I also don’t see why the attorney-general (AG) should not attend, as the AG did not challenge the extension.

Why is it the business of de facto Law Minister Azalina Othman to comment on this anyway? She is in the executive branch and the judiciary does not need her to defend them.

She should instead comment on the very reason why the judiciary does not want the Bar to speak at the event in the first place and deal with the elephant in the room.

Clever Voter: The judiciary is meant to be the protector and custodian of the institution; once broken into by crooked politicians, all trust disappears. Azalina of all people should know this, but she is part of the establishment, so the public don’t expect too much from her.

Double standards and hypocrisy are how we can describe the system today. Politicians are no more than slaves to power and greed. They forgot what they were there for.

Sadly, the judiciary helps to protect this system rather than protecting the public.

Turvy: The audacity of politicians to argue on the principles founding the very institutions they have systematically vandalised.

This person, now chiding what is perhaps the last of our bastions against the crumbling of national values, stood by, no, was complicit in the denigration of the judiciary. Now she pretends a moral position and a loftiness with which she can judge others.

If instead of hollow pontifications, she and her ilk in the ruling party could but pause for a while and examine what they have done to this country in the last four decades, how they have destroyed one of the finest countries, they may still be able to do what is right – resign en bloc.

Anonymous_3f4b: I feel the Bar Council is playing politics with the judiciary.

They are seeking the courts to declare the appointments of Raus and Court of Appeal (COA) president Justice Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin as unconstitutional, which makes the matter potentially subjudice.

Thus, to raise it during the opening of the Legal Year can be seen as in contempt of court and an affront to the judiciary and all those present.

Worse still, the Bar Council saw it fit to hold their own opening of the Legal Year at a private club.

The Bar is not a private entity catering to some elites for them to hold a private function at a club. They should have the common sense and decency to hold it at the Bar’s premises and open it to all lawyers who wish to be present.

As it is, none of the practising lawyers received any notification about the private opening of the Legal Year by the Bar.

It makes one wonder whether the Bar is a representative body for all lawyers or a private club catering to some elite members.

Gerard Lourdesamy: It is the government that has been playing politics with the judiciary ever since the unconstitutional appointments of Raus and Zulkefli were made as additional judges of the Federal Court but holding the office of CJ and COA president.

There is nothing subjudice about a constitutional challenge. Are the Federal Court judges so easily swayed by speeches from the president of the Bar and the AG that it would impede their ability to decide the case impartially and objectively?

There was no private opening of the Legal Year by the Bar Council at the Royal Lake Club. It was a pre-opening of the Legal Year dinner where the president gave a speech.

It has been the custom to hold such a dinner to entertain the representatives of the overseas judiciary, foreign bar associations and those from Sabah and Sarawak who are attending the opening of the Legal Year event.

The diplomatic corps are also invited. It is a private dinner party hosted by the Bar Council and not an EGM (extraordinary general meeting) of the Bar.

Perak Boleh: This is still a democratic country where nobody can force somebody to attend any function that is against their principles.

RM2.6 Billion Turkey Haram: Well done, Malaysian Bar for its unwavering stand for justice. The people support its stand. The CJ is unethical to disallow the Bar to make its speech. Shame on you, CJ.

Legal Year event now renamed ‘Judicial Year’

Vote BN Out: ‘Judicial Year’ must necessarily mean it is restricted to members of the judiciary only.

So, you send out invitations from now on, unlike the automatic participation of the Bar Council and the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

And the Bar Council won’t attend, but certain members of the Bar will, for whatever reason.

Vijay47: How typical of Umno to change the rules, move the goalposts and play a new game. “Semua OK, semua biasa.” (All okay, everything is normal.)

The Bar Council was absolutely right in distancing itself from the judiciary’s “Family Day”. If traitors attended, that is their right. And I am sure all had a good time!

Anonymous 706151436780066: The judiciary appears to have forgotten that without lawyers they have no cases to hear or judge; they would literally have no work to do and become redundant.

Righteosness4all: Well, the year of the dog is really starting at the right time. The whole episode of the opening of the ‘Judicial Year’ has really gone to the dogs.

We have to hope that the good and righteous dog starts after GE14.

Gerard Lourdesamy: Legal Year or Judicial Year, what difference does it make when there is injustice all around?


The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.



Read more : thestar

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *