MB vs MB: Where are Appeals Court's grounds?
The Court of Appeal Judges Who Sat on the Case:
1. Md Raus Shariff,
2. Ahmad Maarop
3. Zainun Ali
Court of Appeal judge Datuk Md Raus Sharif had promised on May 22 that the written judgment would be made available IN A WEEK, when Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin’s counsel Sulaiman Abdullah gave notice of leave application to the Federal Court to appeal.The Appeals Court gave a FIVE -minute decision.
I would have thought that, you give the 'grounds’ FIRST and having weighed the evidence, come to a decision.
But giving the decision WITHOUT first giving the 'grounds' would be tantamount to putting the cart before the horse.
In proving a theorem, we give our 'grounds' (reasons) to convince the reader or examiner that we have proven our case. Then, and only then, do we write Q.E.D which stands for 'quod erat demonstrandum' which means 'that is what I wanted to prove and I have proved it.'.
A good judge will " PROVE" his DECISION by giving all the grounds (reasons). He does not jump to the conclusion without showing why his decision is such and such.
The High Court judge (Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim ) gave a 78-page written judgment on who is the rightful MB of Perak.
In my view, the High Court Judge (Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim) did a GOOD job. He was meticulous and read out all the authorities. Backed up by solid evidence, he came to the conclusion that Nizar was the rightful Perak MB at all material times.
On the other hand, the Appeals Court judges read out in FIVE minutes their decision! After having given their decision (on May 22) that Zambry was the rightful MB, they said that they needed time – one week – to give the 'grounds' of their decision.
Any right-thinking observer would find it strange that judges could write Q.E.D. first before having backed it up with solid reasons.
If they had the reasons handy, they should NOT be taking so much time writing them out.