PERAK CRISIS: How Perakians and Malaysians Are Being Screwed by the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal

Read here

Chief Justice Zaki Azmi was an UMNO member and served as a Legal Advisor to UMNO. His previous position in UMNO was as the Chairman of UMNO's Disciplinary Committee. Chief Justice Zaki Azmi was an UMNO member and served as a Legal Advisor to UMNO. His previous position in UMNO was as the Chairman of UMNO's Disciplinary Committee. His ties to UMNO is too deep for him to ensure the independence of the judiciary especially in cases involving the interest of UMNO or UMNO cronies. He has only served the judiciary for less than 5 years in total before becoming the Chief Justice, an unprecedented leap-frogging to the top post in the Judiciary with help of the UMNO-led Government. As UMNO’s legal man, Tan Sri Zaki Azmi was involved with the UMNO's myriad scandalous financial misadventures that were bailed out by the government in the heydays of former Prime Minister Mahathir’s crony-capitalism during the last Asian financial crisis." (Asia Sentinel - 7 December 2007)

On late Monday afternoon, the court ruled that Nizar is still the Menteri Besar of Perak.

On early Tuesday morning, the Appeal Court allowed a stay of execution. This means Nizar was back as Menteri Besar for a mere couple of hours yesterday and then had to hand the state back to Zambry.

What was astonishing was the SPEED in which the Appeal Court sat to make its decision when there are still so many older cases pending -- sometimes up to ten years while the convicted persons awaiting the outcome of their appeal languish in jail without bail during all that time.

And the beauty about this is, even if they lose their appeal, their jail sentence is shorter than the time they have thus far spent in prison under remand. Some have withdrawn their appeal just so that they can go home. It is better to plead guilty or not contest the verdict since the sentence is shorter than the time they would have to spend in prison under remand.

The second thing that has astonished most people; lawyers especially, is the one-man quorum that sat to hear Zambry’s application for a stay of execution. They would have expected a minimum quorum of three judges since this case is of great public interest.

But only one man sat to hear Zambry’s application and it certainly does not give an impression that Nizar saw justice done yesterday in the Appeal Court.

Nizar’s lawyers appeared unhappy that there was insufficient notice given for on May 12’s hearing by the Court of Appeal as there is usually a one-day notice under normal circumstances from the time of filing. It is learnt that Nizar's counsel, Sulaiman only knew of the hearing by coincidence when he was at the Palace of Justice to attend another case, as Zambry’s lawyers had filed the application at about 9.30am on May 12.

That happened to Raja Petra Kamarudin in the appeal that the government filed against his release from ISA detention in November last year. Raja Petra asked for a quorum of seven judges. If not, Raja Petra' s lawyers would settle for five judges.

But the court refused Raja Petra both seven and five and agreed on only three. Question was: Why only three and whose decision was that? It was an administrative decision, meaning a court clerk somewhere decided that it should be three.

Related Article

Read here for more more

There is disbelief within the legal profession that one of the most controversial cases to pass through the court system this year did not go before a full panel of appeal judges.

It is very rare for a single-judge Court of Appeal to grant a permanent stay of execution, say veteran lawyers. But it is not unprecedented for a single-judge Court of Appeal to hear an application for a stay of execution. It has happened before in Malaysia when time was of the essence and there was a shortage of appeal court judges on duty.

What normally happens is that if a lone appeal court judge finds some merit in an argument by the appellants, he will grant an interim stay of execution, leaving the question of a permanent stay to a three-judge Court of Appeal.

This issue of a single-judge Court of Appeal arose today after newly-minted Court of Appeal judge Datuk Ramly Ali granted Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir a stay of execution against a High Court declaration that Datuk Nizar Jamaluddin was the rightful Mentri Besar of Perak.

What surprised lawyers was the decision to appoint a single-judge Court of Appeal to hear the application for a stay of execution instead of putting the case before the three three-judge appeal panels which were presiding over cases at the Palace of Justice today.

They also noted that Ramly should have ONLY granted an INTERIM stay and not a permanent one.

Given the gravity of the case and political ramifications, several lawyers noted that the court registrar should have ensured that Zambry’s stay application was heard by a three-judge panel, and not one of the most junior appeal court judges.

Lim Kit Siang said that “the stay given by a single judge of the Court of Appeal did not overturn the High Court decision and could not be taken to mean that Zambry can continue to be illegal and illegitimate Perak MB. It only 'STAYED' Nizar from taking back his lawful and legitimate office as Perak Mentri Besar.

“The lawyers I spoke to in the past few hours are shocked at the Court of Appeal single-judge ’stay’ decision.’’


Krisis di Perak Sudah Jadi Politik Kartun

Read here for more

Petang semalam Dato' Seri Nizar Jamaluddin disahkan Menteri Besar Perak. Tiba-tiba petang ini pula Dato' Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir diberi semula jawatan itu.

Tidakkah situasi ini memeningkan. Rakyat di bawah lebih bercelaru lagi apabila mengikuti perkembangan kes di Perak sekarang.

Apakah babak-babak kartun sudah mulai meresap ke dalam politik Malaysia.

Anggota parlimen Pasir Puteh, Mohamad Hussin berkata, krisis politik di Perak tidak akan selesai selagi mandat tidak dikembalikan kepada rakyat.

Katanya ketika ditemui di sini:

"Mahkamah bukan jalan terbaik bagi menyelesaikan konflik politik yang berlaku di Perak sekarang. Tengoklah apa yang berlaku hari ini.

Semalam Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur mengesahkan kedudukan Nizar sebagai Menteri Besar.

Tetapi hari ini Mahkamah Rayuan membenarkan permohonan Zambry untuk menangguhkan keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi.

Tidakkah ini seperti kartun yang ditertawakan orang luar."

Peguam Zambry berhujah penangguhan keputusan mahkamah semalam penting untuk menghalang Nizar daripada mendapatkan perkenan Sultan Perak bagi membubarkan Dewan Undangan Negeri.

Semalam Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi, Dato' Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim mengisytiharkan Nizar sebagai Menteri Besar Perak yang sah.

Mohamad berkata, mahkamah bukan lagi jalan terbaik bagi menyelesaikan isu yang berbangkit di Perak sekarang.

"Ini kerana dari awal lagi krisis di Perak berpunca daripada sikap rakus pemimpin Umno selepas hilang kuasa pada pilihan raya umum lalu," katanya.