Bar Council's bunkum!

Posted: 07 Jun 2014 10:20 PM PDT

The statement by Bar Council's chairman Christopher Leong that Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak must withdraw his defamation suit against Malaysiakini, only reflects the Council's double standard and its indisputable support for the opposition.

For all we know, the Council only supports the cause of the opposition. They were not happy with the prime minister's suit but went all out to ensure Lim Guan Eng wins his case against Utusan Malaysia; and other suits filed by the opposition against the government and BN-link entities.

What kind of lawyers are they?

What 'accountability' was Christopher (pic) ludicrously referring to when he and his team are not even fit to be called 'lawyers' for screwing their own charter, playing bad politics and going against their own propagation of 'fair legal rights' for everybody!
Datuk Seri Najib Razak's defamation suit against a news portal sets a bad precedent as he is in effect suing the media for the views and comments of the public to whom he is accountable, the Bar Council said.
Its chairman Christopher Leong (pic) said public officials were accountable to the people who have entrusted them with positions of public office and responsibility.
"The duties of good governance and accountability should demand the public official be able to endure the full brunt of free speech," he said in a statement today.
Leong said the prime minister and Umno president should not use civil defamation action against criticism, whether substantiated or otherwise.
"This sets a bad precedent and sends the wrong message," he said.
He said public officials, especially those holding high public offices, and political parties should not resort to defamation suits as an answer to criticism or comment.
"They should accept such adverse comments, no matter how vitriolic, obnoxious or untrue. So long as it does not affect the person in his or her private sphere," he said.
They are just a bunch of Pakatan Rakyat's political hoodlums. Together with the opposition, they couldn't care less about the rights of others but defend and protect the rights of criminals by bashing and denigrate the police and the government.

They never expressed sympathy and offered words of condolence to families of policemen killed by criminals but they went all out to look after the welfare of the murderers, drug dwellers and criminals jailed and their families.

You call them lawyers? No, they are worse than animals for their inhumane hearts!

And PM's adviser Rais Yatim was right about it, slamming Bar Council of being bias and only cares for the legal rights of the opposition. 
KUALA LUMPUR: The action of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak in filing a defamation suit against news portal Malaysiakini and its top two editors is a move towards ensuring the fundamental rights of the Umno president, said Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim.
Rais, who is adviser to the government on social and cultural affairs, said as a person with dignity, the prime minister would want to clear his name, having been embarassed and ridiculed.
The best venue for him to do so is in court, Rais said in a statement here yesterday.
Rais, in commenting on a statement by Malaysian Bar president Christopher Leong calling for Najib and Umno to withdraw the suit, said it clearly reflected the council's involvement in politics, without any care for a person's right to seek justice in court.
On May 30, Najib in his capacity as Umno president, and Umno executive secretary Datuk Ab Rauf Yusoh filed a defamation suit against the company operating the Malaysiakini portal and two of its editors over the publication of two articles last month.

The writ of summons was filed through Messrs Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak at the High Court registry here. Najib and Ab Rauf (on behalf of Umno) named Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd, Malaysiakini.com editor-in-chief Steven Gan and chief editor Fathi Aris Omar as the first, second and third defendants, respectively.

In their statement of claim, Najib and Ab Rauf claimed that the three defendants had reported, produced and allowed to be published two articles entitled 'A case of the PM reaping what he sows' and 'How much will Najib spend to keep Terengganu?' It is claimed that the articles were published on May 14.

Christopher and his buddies deserve no right to talk about 'accountability' which they themselves don't have, and neither do they possess the right integrity to be called 'advocates and solicitors' for their bad decorum!

They should understand what 'accountability', 'precedent' and 'integrity' mean before telling others about it...

Also read PUTRA MERDEKA post.

Who's funding you, Tian Chua?

Posted: 07 Jun 2014 05:15 AM PDT

Why was PKR vice-president so worried about the government's plan to monitor the flow of fund to political parties? I thought he would be among the first to support the move as it enables the rakyat to know 'who and what' have been financing them.

Instead, he chose to oppose! Why?

He criticised the suggestions made by the National Key Result Areas (NKRA) to study the need for an act to monitor political funds, as a means to divert the attention of the people.
KUALA LUMPUR, June 7 (Bernama) -- Faced with the problem of setting up a body to monitor political funds because of lack of cooperation from political parties, the National Key Result Area (NKRA) Against Corruption is now planning to study the need for creating an act for the purpose.
The body is of the opinion legal provision was needed to make it mandatory for political parties to declare their sources of political funds to create transparency.
National Key Result Area (NKRA) Against Corruption director Datuk Hisham Nordin said it was looking at the need to create a new act or proposing amendments to existing ones at several government agencies involved in supervising political parties.
"We are also scrutinising several other acts such as the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, Election Commission Act, Registrar of Societies and Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act to look at needs to propose amendments," he told Bernama here.
Hisham said whether it was a new act or amendments to existing ones, NKRA Against Corruption was of the opinion that political funds could only be monitored effectively when the need to report sources of political funds was mandatory to all political parties.
Hisham said political parties might not be prepared to reveal their respective political fund contributors currently to protect the credibility of certain leaders in the party concerned.
"I am of the view that monitoring political funds is crucial to shut of all opportunities and openings for corruptions. As such, every political fund channelled must be audited and recorded to show the transparency of the party," he said.
In February 2012, through the Government Transformation Plan (GTP), Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had announced a new initiative to eradicate corruption to control political financing and investigate abuse of funds under the National Key Result Area (NKRA) Against Corruption.
What were Tian Chua and the opposition afraid of? Wasn't they the ones who questioned the amount of money 'spent' by Barisan Nasional candidates in the past general election?

And I can't help but agree with some allegations that the opposition could have been taking funds from the 'underworld', and for that reasons they are against the enactment of the new law to monitor such assistance.

Even Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi accused the opposition of defending only the criminals, partly because they were funded by the underworld in the last general election.
Pakatan Rakyat only fights for the rights of criminals, partly because it is funded by criminals in the last general election, Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi says today.
He was addressing some 200 policemen in Teluk Intan when he said that the opposition pact was not interested in the human rights of the police.
He said this was evident when the late Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh did not visit a policeman from his constituency who had died in the line of duty.
"A police officer died at the hands of a gangster in Malacca and he, coincidentally, was from Bukit Gelugor. When his body was brought back to Penang, the MP did not even see him.
"Who went? The ones who cared went. They, who claim to fight for human rights, did not even go when police are injured or killed. This means they only defend criminals.
"Those people help them, maybe in the previous general election. They did not even visit the fallen policeman, never mind give aid to orphans."
He added that when debating laws on prevention without trial in Parliament, Karpal had demanded that the rights of criminals be protected.
"I asked him, what about the rights of the police? What happened to that? What if police get shot or are injured? The rights of the police should be prioritised, not the criminals," said Zahid.
Strange because none of the opposition leaders had tried to rebut or deny such accusations. Could it be true?

Tian Chua, what's your comment?


Jom berjuang bersama rakan bloggers di Facebook!

Tunjukkan sokongan anda! Sila Like.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...