Can anybody becomes a court judge?.
One don't need a degree to answer that, but one certainly needs an adequate knowledge to be able to compute certain situations pertaining to 'complicated' case(s) taking place in our judicial system.
As a layman, I find it difficult to comprehend how judge(s) of higher courts for instance, could have a differing and/or contradicting judgement on a particular case brought and heard before them?.
How a case with a guilty verdict (conviction made), ended up overturned by the higher courts upon appeal?.
What many would understand about judge is the fact that they have the responsibilities to preside over cases brought before the court and review legal briefs, argument and most importantly evidence presented by both combating parties, defense and the prosecution (criminal cases).
A judge will, at the end of the trial pass the final verdict favoring one of the above.
In a criminal case, a judge will also decide on the sentence should a conviction is made. That much people without sound legal background would know.
What they would want to know is, how a case with conviction and a death sentence could end up with acquittal in the higher courts.
When a High Court judgment is overturned by the Appellate Court for instance, public would assume the former has seriously erred in his judgement.
That raises question as to how a case of such magnitude (punishment by death) could have been erred by a judge?. Under such circumstances, public would form an impression that the judge of the said court as being
incompetent.
Will the judge be subjected to any action(s) deem(s) fit for error(s) of their judgement?
At any time, public would expect judges to function as independent, unbiased and fair arbiters thus, judges must carry and/or conduct themselves in most appropriate manner, professional and respectful at all material times.
While some members of the public dare to opine that many legal outcomes can be explained and predicted, in the case of former accused murderers of a Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaaribuu - Sirul Azhar and Azilah, public is confused when the Appellate Courts acquitted them without any order for a retrial, whatsoever. At this point, both former accused are free men - under the law.
The Federal Courts will be the highest court of the land for prosecution to seek redress and an application for an appeal has to be made.Pending appeal to be heard, both former accused will walk free.
When the Appellate court ruled there had been a serious misdirection by the Shah Alam High Court judge who heard the case, what does it means?.
What public could not understand is, can misdirection of the High Court judge free the former accused?.
What about arguement and evidences heard before the High Court?.
The High Court judge would not have passed a death sentence without undisputed evidences, the least to say?.
At this point public are confused - thus asked, if it was the judge that has erred, why the Appellate Court did not rule for the case be heard before a substituted judge in a new trial?
What will happen should the Federal Court (upon appeal) -
1) Rule the Appellate Court was right and judgement sustained?
2) Rule the Appellate Court erred in their judgement and rule for a retrial?
Surely both would have it's serious implications.
In the case of item 1, the obvious implications will be, acquittal becomes permanent and that the former two accused escape further trial and potential punishment for the crime, if they are found guilty.
On a different note, it puts the High Court judge of Shah Alam who heard the case in a bad light.
As for item 2, the implications will be on the panel of judges of the Appellate Courts.
That would invite speculation and/or allegation of possible attempt by unseen hands to use them and the Appellate Court. This would also raise the question on the independence of the judiciary.
Must public be blamed for forming their own opinions?.
To them, there had been many cases involving murders in this land and the courts had no difficulty to convict or acquit based on argument and evidence presented before the courts itself.
In the case of Sirul and Azilah - to most people, it looks like it was a technical acquittal.
What public wants to know, how will the courts deal with cases of this nature?.
Has justice been done to the murdered Altantuya?
The court is the last place for justice and it (the court) is provided with authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties in accordance with the rule of law.
When the court seen failed to exercise it's authority, where would the party(ies) seeking justice turn(s) to?.
In this particular case, a foreign woman had her entry record erased then found inhumanely killed (shots in the head) then her remains C4ed to pieces in this land, isn't it just too dramatic to get the public into believing natural causes as the cause of her death?
Whether or not public opinion believes the former accused duo are guilty as charged by Shah Alam High Court and whether or not public opinion believes there are others in collaboration to the murder of Altantuya, it would continue to remain as opinion.
What is certain, should the Altantuya case failed to be resolved satisfactorily by Malaysian courts, it (the case) would further deteriorate our very own judiciary and the govt at international level.
Or, do we have to wait for a new govt in power to see the above crime resolved?
Your answer would be as good as mine.
No comments:
Post a Comment