Without Fear or favour: Judge V.T. Singham

Che Hong Yee vs A-G

Catchword: Unlawful detention, arbitrary use of power, breach of natural justice, Justice sacrificed for Administrative convenience.

High Court judge Datuk V.T. Singham ruled that the detention of Che Hong Yee under the restricted residence order was null and void. Judge Singham said the tactical manoeuvre by the police in retaining the documents in their possession and not handing them over to Che prevented him from exercising his right to appeal against his detention.

The following are abstracts of his judgment (culled from NSTP):

“It is important to stress that where the right of a person was prejudicially affected, his arrest and detention should be dealt with in all fairness.”

“Any arbitrary use of power is looked upon with disdain by the court. The enforcement agency must strive to act justifiably, fairly and impartially.”

“Justice cannot be sacrificed for administrative convenience.”

“The conduct of the police [in Che Hong Yee’s case] was not only a serious departure from the rules of natural justice but struck at the core of it because their act deprived him of the opportunity to effectively explain the charges against him.” [emphasis added]

“This court is therefore satisfied that there has been a breach of natural justice.”

-High Court Judge Datuk VT Singham

Breach of natural justice! That's what we Malaysians are concerned with. We have loss confidence in our judicial system per se as evidenced by the revelation of the Lingham's video clip.

The only consolation is that we still have judges that shows they are bold to uphold natural justice and the rule of law, not the rule of man.

Yesterday, we hear of Tun Dzaiddin who was the chairman of the Royal Commission which was set up to look into the state of police corruption, and of which the IPCMC was mooted. Tun Dzaiddin said the proposed Special Complaints Commission (SCC) now being formed by an Act of Parliament, was "something entirely different from what we recommended". "The government, in its wisdom, did not accept the core recommendation of an independent oversight body." True to Nazri's character, the minister in the Prime Minister's Department said people who were dissatisfied with the body were "ignoramuses" who did not fully understand how the country's law enforcement and legal system worked.

He dismissed claims that the SCC was a watered-down version of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), which was what the 2005 royal commission into the police had asked for.

Ignoramuses? People with no knowledge, that's what it means. He is implying Tun Dzaiddin as a person without knowledge. Nazri is also implying that Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim, the former president of Transparency International Malaysia, and Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye, both of whom also said they did not expect the IPCMC to be watered down, are all ignoramuses.

So what's the point of setting up Royal Commissions when the recommendations for improvement would not be adopted and creatively redesigned to suit conveniences and appetite.

In the NSTP today, we can read few pages of spinnings to justify the police and the Home Ministry's imposition of ISA on citizens.

IGP Musa Hassan said investigation of Hindraf's movement had deemed their activities are a threat to national security. So the ISA was imperative.

When Tun Razak presented the Bill for the ISA in Parliament for its 2nd reading he assured the parliamentarians that 'it is not the pleasure of the Government to order the detention of any person, nor will the powers be abused.' At the time when the ISA Bill was tabled in Parliament, there was then 583 armed terrorists active in Northern Malaya and there was a need to protect the people from the communists subversion (see: Salleh Bujang, Tun Suffian Legacy). Tun Razak assured the MPs that the law would only be used with utmost care, so that it SHALL NOT be abused. (To find out to what extent this promise has been kept by the government of the day since Tun Razak's time, read the reports by Human Rights Watch entitled "In the Name of Security: Counterterrorism and Human Rights Abuses under Malaysia's ISA" May 2004 Vol. 16 No. 7, and "Detained without Trial - Abuses of ISA detainees in Malaysia" Sept 2005 Vol. 17 No. 9)

To justify the detention without trial, IGP had sourced a reason - Tamil Tigers' threat - possibility of Hindraf's connectivity. What an excuse.

The NSTP goes on spinning with some interviews of politicians:

Datuk Seri William Mawan Ikom, Sarawak Minister of Social Development and urbanization: "Expressing our freedom through street protests is in direct violation of the freedoms of other people who want to live in peace and harmony."

What a crap. The Constitution states that's part of the rights of citizens, peaceful assembly; that's not violation of the freedom of others who want to live in peace and harmony. As an example, non Muslims must accept that Friday is a day the Muslims will go to the Mosque to pray and the cars will be double/triple parked on the roads thereby obstructing the free flow of the traffics and some roads may be closed to facilitate the event. Nobody complaints about that loss of freedom and illegal parking. At the same time, during Taipusam and Chinese festivals, there are processions and stage shows which may caused noise pollution and disturbance; nobody said that's violation of the freedom of others; we live in harmony.

What we want is what is stated in the Constitution; nothing more, nothing less.