Petikan daripada esei saya untuk Pertandingan Menulis Makalah Undang-undang 2004 yang bertajuk:"Hukuman gantung ke atas pemberi dan penerima boleh membendung jenayah rasuah?".
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oleh kerana rasuah adalah satu jenayah yang dilakukan secara sulit, maka adalah mustahil untuk mendapatkan perangkaan tentang kes rasuah yang sebenarnya berlaku. Sebagai alternatif, persepsi terhadap kejadian rasuah seringkali digunakan sebagai kayu ukur. Indeks Persepsi Rasuah yang diterbitkan oleh Transparency International merupakan sumber berwibawa. Indeks tersebut diperolehi dengan soal-selidik untuk mendapatkan perspektif ahli perniagaan asing terhadap rasuah dalam sektor awam.
Kedudukan Malaysia ialah dalam lingkungan 4.8 hingga 5.32 daripada skala 10 bagi tempoh 1996-2003. Kedudukan Malaysia adalah jauh di belakang dengan negara jiran kita, Singapura yang mencapai markah melebihi 9 dan berkedudukan dalam senarai 10 negara yang paling kurang rasuah.
Dalam aspek ini, Kerajaan Malaysia telah menggariskan Pelan Integriti Nasional [i] yang bertujuan untuk menggubal strategi bagi semua sektor masyarakat demi memantapkan nilai etika dan integriti. Pelan ini mempunyai sasaran lima tahun (2004-2008) yang konkrit iaitu untuk mengurangkan gejala rasuah, penyelewengan dan salahguna kuasa serta meningkatkan kedudukan Malaysia dalam Indeks Persepsi Rasuah dari 5.2 (tahun 2003) ke 6.5 (tahun 2008). [ii]
[i] Dato Seri Abdullah bin Haji Ahmad Badawi, Ucapan Majlis Pelancaran Pelan Integriti Nasional, 23 April 2004, http://www.pmo.gov.my/
[ii] New Straits Times, 27 Julai 2004 ,ms8.
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Friday, July 02, 2004
Finally, NZ cut off the legal umbilical cord
Starting from 1 July 2004, The Supreme Court of New Zealand swings into action and becomes the court of final appeal in NZ. Prior to this, Privy Council located in London is the last avenue for appeal case.
Finally, NZ has followed the footsteps of his peer Commonwealth countries like Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and Hong Kong achieving legal independence by severing the legal umbilical cord with London.
For Malaysia, Privy Council appeals in criminal and constitutional matters were abolished on 1 January 1978 and all other appeals i.e. civil appeals except those filed before that date were abolished 7 years later (1 January 1985).
Finally, NZ has followed the footsteps of his peer Commonwealth countries like Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and Hong Kong achieving legal independence by severing the legal umbilical cord with London.
For Malaysia, Privy Council appeals in criminal and constitutional matters were abolished on 1 January 1978 and all other appeals i.e. civil appeals except those filed before that date were abolished 7 years later (1 January 1985).
A note on Foo Dui Geng's case
The High Court struck off 22-year old Foo Dui Geng's application. Foo applied for the court order to compel his father to pay maintenance (tuition fees over RM80K, accommodation and allowances) until he completes his first degree in United Kingdom.
Issues: Should the Maintenance for the children have ceased upon their reaching 18?
Conclusion: Base on the authority of KARUNAIRAJAH RASIAH V. PUNITHAMBIGAI PONIAH (Federal Court) and the spirit of stare decisis, Foo's case was struck out.
Chronology of judgements:
1. CHING SENG WOAH V. LIM SHOOK LIN (COURT OF APPEAL, KUALA LUMPUR)
[1997] 1 CLJ 375
The Court of Appeal held that in appropriate cases, involuntary financial dependence was a physical disability under s. 95.
The Court of Appeal has the following observation:
"An 18 year old computer whiz-kid who is a wheel chair case and therefore well able to earn a living at that age could here be contrasted with another 18 year old who is physically and mentally fit but is otherwise totally unable to fend for himself on the job market. In the present case we have no evidence of the accomplishments of the two daughters. However we must take note that unlike the United Kingdom and many other European countries, Malaysia is not a welfare state. Whilst the married women's claim to a share of the matrimonial assets is now entrenched in our laws, the rights of the dependent young persons in these assets is yet to receive proper articulation. Kulasingam v. Rosammah [1981] 2 MLJ 36 was not cited to us, but that 20 year old daughter was claiming under the Married Women and Children (Maintenance) Ordinance 1950. Notwithstanding the definition of disability, under s. 17 of the English Children's Act 1989 (also not cited to us but see Bromley Family Law 8th Edn., p. 643) we are inclined to the view that in appropriate cases involuntary financial dependence is a physical disability under s. 95 of the Act . There are far reaching social implications here and we would prefer to say no more now as to whether English attitudes are suitable to Malaysian conditions in such a case or its corollary which is the duty to aged and dependent parents by their progeny."
2. PUNITHAMBIGAI PONIAH V. KARUNAIRAJAH RASIAH (High Court) 15 OCTOBER 1999
High Court followed the decision in Ching Seng Woah (Court of Appeal).
3. Court of Appeal reaffirmed the decision of High Court.
4. KARUNAIRAJAH RASIAH V. PUNITHAMBIGAI PONIAH
FEDERAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD FCJ, MOHD NOOR AHMAD FCJ, PAJAN SINGH GILL FCJ
9 APRIL 2004 [2004] 2 CLJ 365
FC over-ruled the judgement of the court below.
The Federal Court distinguished the case of Ching Seng Woah on the ground that in that case, the husband agreed in his evidence in chief to pay maintenance to his daughters until they received their first degree. The ratio decendendi is that a person could not be permitted to reprobate what he had approbated.
The FC also strictly interepreted the word "disability" in s. 95 of the 1976 Act covers only "physical" and "mental" disability. It did not cover financial dependence. According to FC, there is no legal basis for interpreting the exceptions in s. 95 to include financial dependence for the purpose of pursuing tertiary education after the child attains the age of 18.
FC also made an observation that The Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984 is more advanced than its civil counterpart. Section 79 of 1984 Act specifically provides that the court is empowered to make a maintenance order beyond the child's age of 18 "to cover such further period as it thinks reasonable, to enable the child to pursue further or higher education or training".
Issues: Should the Maintenance for the children have ceased upon their reaching 18?
Conclusion: Base on the authority of KARUNAIRAJAH RASIAH V. PUNITHAMBIGAI PONIAH (Federal Court) and the spirit of stare decisis, Foo's case was struck out.
Chronology of judgements:
1. CHING SENG WOAH V. LIM SHOOK LIN (COURT OF APPEAL, KUALA LUMPUR)
[1997] 1 CLJ 375
The Court of Appeal held that in appropriate cases, involuntary financial dependence was a physical disability under s. 95.
The Court of Appeal has the following observation:
"An 18 year old computer whiz-kid who is a wheel chair case and therefore well able to earn a living at that age could here be contrasted with another 18 year old who is physically and mentally fit but is otherwise totally unable to fend for himself on the job market. In the present case we have no evidence of the accomplishments of the two daughters. However we must take note that unlike the United Kingdom and many other European countries, Malaysia is not a welfare state. Whilst the married women's claim to a share of the matrimonial assets is now entrenched in our laws, the rights of the dependent young persons in these assets is yet to receive proper articulation. Kulasingam v. Rosammah [1981] 2 MLJ 36 was not cited to us, but that 20 year old daughter was claiming under the Married Women and Children (Maintenance) Ordinance 1950. Notwithstanding the definition of disability, under s. 17 of the English Children's Act 1989 (also not cited to us but see Bromley Family Law 8th Edn., p. 643) we are inclined to the view that in appropriate cases involuntary financial dependence is a physical disability under s. 95 of the Act . There are far reaching social implications here and we would prefer to say no more now as to whether English attitudes are suitable to Malaysian conditions in such a case or its corollary which is the duty to aged and dependent parents by their progeny."
2. PUNITHAMBIGAI PONIAH V. KARUNAIRAJAH RASIAH (High Court) 15 OCTOBER 1999
High Court followed the decision in Ching Seng Woah (Court of Appeal).
3. Court of Appeal reaffirmed the decision of High Court.
4. KARUNAIRAJAH RASIAH V. PUNITHAMBIGAI PONIAH
FEDERAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD FCJ, MOHD NOOR AHMAD FCJ, PAJAN SINGH GILL FCJ
9 APRIL 2004 [2004] 2 CLJ 365
FC over-ruled the judgement of the court below.
The Federal Court distinguished the case of Ching Seng Woah on the ground that in that case, the husband agreed in his evidence in chief to pay maintenance to his daughters until they received their first degree. The ratio decendendi is that a person could not be permitted to reprobate what he had approbated.
The FC also strictly interepreted the word "disability" in s. 95 of the 1976 Act covers only "physical" and "mental" disability. It did not cover financial dependence. According to FC, there is no legal basis for interpreting the exceptions in s. 95 to include financial dependence for the purpose of pursuing tertiary education after the child attains the age of 18.
FC also made an observation that The Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984 is more advanced than its civil counterpart. Section 79 of 1984 Act specifically provides that the court is empowered to make a maintenance order beyond the child's age of 18 "to cover such further period as it thinks reasonable, to enable the child to pursue further or higher education or training".
The Noritta Samsudin murder trial -- the importance of forensic science
The accused Haniff is a free man now. The High Court ruled that the prosecution failed to make a prima facie case against the accused.
It is submitted that the prosecution did not pay enough attention to forensic details.
Among the forensic techniques used in these case are
1. DNA profiling
2. Fingerprint lifting
I am puzzled to read that the prosecution has charged Haniff in court prior to the release of DNA report. This is a grave mistake by the prosecution.
Besides that, we should beef up the police forensic team. It is annoying to know that the cameraman also has additional role to lift the fingerprint of the crime scene. I think the poor cameraman was over-burden and he actually only lift the fingerprint of the door knob of one side and ignoring the other side.
The police forensic team should have a team member called Latent Fingerprint Examiner and his/her role is for processing fingerprints at the crime scene and nothing else.
Perhaps, it is timely to send Police Investigation officers and Deputy Public Prosecutors to attend forensic science course. UM Law Faculty offered a one-year full time Master in Criminal Justice which fits into this requirement. The MCJ course covers the core subjects of forensic science and law.
There is also a BSc Forensic Science course offered by USM (Kelantan). It is more lean
towards forensic science.
There is also a forensic science mailing list for self-learners. Those participate in the mailing list are forensic scientists and legal enforcement officers from all over the world. There are 2000 over participants in the list.
Another good intro to Forensic Science is Dr Henry Lee's site. He has served as police officer in both Taiwan and USA, earned his degree, master and PhD in Chemical and Forensic Science in USA.
It is submitted that the prosecution did not pay enough attention to forensic details.
Among the forensic techniques used in these case are
1. DNA profiling
2. Fingerprint lifting
I am puzzled to read that the prosecution has charged Haniff in court prior to the release of DNA report. This is a grave mistake by the prosecution.
Besides that, we should beef up the police forensic team. It is annoying to know that the cameraman also has additional role to lift the fingerprint of the crime scene. I think the poor cameraman was over-burden and he actually only lift the fingerprint of the door knob of one side and ignoring the other side.
The police forensic team should have a team member called Latent Fingerprint Examiner and his/her role is for processing fingerprints at the crime scene and nothing else.
Perhaps, it is timely to send Police Investigation officers and Deputy Public Prosecutors to attend forensic science course. UM Law Faculty offered a one-year full time Master in Criminal Justice which fits into this requirement. The MCJ course covers the core subjects of forensic science and law.
There is also a BSc Forensic Science course offered by USM (Kelantan). It is more lean
towards forensic science.
There is also a forensic science mailing list for self-learners. Those participate in the mailing list are forensic scientists and legal enforcement officers from all over the world. There are 2000 over participants in the list.
Another good intro to Forensic Science is Dr Henry Lee's site. He has served as police officer in both Taiwan and USA, earned his degree, master and PhD in Chemical and Forensic Science in USA.
Thursday, July 01, 2004
National Service And Gender Equality
This is the excerpt of my essay written for the Inter-varsity Essay Competition organised by Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. The discussion is about whether female should be included in the National Service Trainging Programme. I discussed the topic from a legalistic lense.
The essay is written in National Language.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Di sini saya ingin membuat tinjauan terhadap perundangan semasa di Malaysia untuk menentukan tahap kemajuan taraf wanita di negara ini.
Pada tahun 1995, Malaysia telah membuat ratifikasi terhadap Konvensyen Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu berkenaan Penghapusan Segala Bentuk Diskriminasi terhadap Wanita (The United Nations’ Convention On the Elimination of All Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)) . Negara-negara yang menandatangani Konvesyen ini mempunyai obligasi untuk mengambil langkah-langkah perundangan untuk menghapuskan segala bentuk diskriminasi terhadap wanita. Unjuran daripada ini, Parlimen Malaysia meluluskan pindaan Perlembagaan Malaysia dengan memasukkan perkataan jantina dalam konsep kesamarataan Perlembagaan. Perkembangan dalam hak kesamarataan ini sebenarnya merupakan komitmen kerajaan Malaysia terhadap konvesyen tersebut.
Sebelum pindaan 2001, Perlembagaan adalah senyap terhadap isu kesamarataan lelaki dan perempuan. Niat ini boleh dilihat dari undang-undang seperti Akta Khidmat Negara 1955 yang mengecualikan wanita dalam penyertaan khidmat negara. Sekali pandang, hujah Christine A. Littleton mendapat tempat di undang-undang pra-2001 di Malaysia.
Pindaan Perlembagaan Malaysia yang berlaku pada 2001 adalah memasukkan pengiktirafan terhadap kesamarataan lelaki dan perempuan dengan tambahan perkataan jantina dalam Artikel 8(2).
Untuk mendapat gambaran yang lebih jelas, Artikel 8(1) dan 8(2), 4(1) dan 160(2) Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia harus dibaca bersama.
Artikel 8(1) Perlembagaan Malaysia menyatakan:
“Semua orang adalah sama rata di sisi undang-undang dan berhak mendapat perlindungan yang sama rata di sisi undang-undang”
Selepas pindaan 2001, Artikel 8(2) berbunyi:
“Kecuali sebagaimana dibenarkan dengan nyatanya oleh perlembagaan ini, tidaklah boleh ada perbezaan terhadap warganegara semata-mata oleh sebab agama, kaum, keturunan tempat lahir atau jantina dalam mana-mana undang-undang atau dalam perlantikan bagi apa-apa jawatan atau pekerjaan di bawah sesuatu pihak berkuasa awam atau dalam pentadbiran mana-mana undang-undang berkenaan dengan memperolehi, memegang atau melepaskan harta atau berkenaan dengan menubuh atau menjalankan apa-apa tred, perniagaan, profesyen, vokesyen atau pekerjaan. ”
Artikel 4(1) Perlembagaan menyatakan:
“Perlembagaan ini adalah undang-undang utama Persekutuan dan apa-apa undang-undang yang diluluskan selepas Hari Merdeka dan yang berlawanan dengan Perlembagaan ini hendaklah terbatal setakat yang berlawanan itu.”
Hari Merdeka pula ditakrifkan di bawah Artikel 160(2) sebagai 31 Ogos tahun 1957.
Ini bermaksud, selepas kuatkuasanya pindaan Perlembagaan 2001, sebarang akta adalah tidak sah dan terbatal sekiranya peruntukan adalah berlawanan dengan Artikel 8(2) yang baru.
Berdasarkan tafsiran itu, Akta Program Khidmat Latihan Negara 2003 tidak membuat perbezaan antara jantina. Ini adalah jelas berbeza dengan klausa mewajibkan lelaki sahaja dalam Akta Khidmat Negara 1952. Kedudukan mewajiban lelaki sahaja di bawah Akta Khidmat Negara 1952 masih sah kerana ia diluluskan sebelum Hari Merdeka dan peruntukan Artikel 4(1) hanya terpakai ke atas undang-undang selepas Hari Merdeka.
Mahkamah Persekutuan telah berpeluang membuat tafsiran terhadap Artikel 8 Perlembagaan Persekutuan dalam kes PP v Khong Teng Khen . Mahkamah Persekutuan menyatakan Artikel 8 mengenakan kewajipan ke atas undang-undang untuk melayan orang yang sama dengan layanan yang sama dibawah keadaan yang sama. Artikel 8 tidak mewajibkan undang-undang untuk melayan orang yang sama dengan layanan yang sama di bawah semua keadaan. Artikel 8 menjamin seseorang dalam kelas yang sama harus dilayan dengan layanan yang sama dengan orang lain dengan kelas yang sama. Dalam aspek ini, menurut Mahkamah, Parlimen adalah dibenarkan untuk memasukkan klasifikasi perundangan seperti umur, pendapatan, profesion. Syarat klasifikasi tersebut ialah ia tidak boleh melanggar alasan yang dihalang oleh Artikel 8(2) dan mesti memenuhi piawaian kemunasabahan yang ditentukan oleh mahkamah.
Dr Shad Faruqi juga membuat satu permerhatian yang menarik berkenaan Artikel 8(2). Menurut beliau, Artikel 8(2) hanya menghalang diskriminasi dalam aspek agama, kaum, keturunan, tempat lahir atau jantina semata-mata. Sekiranya isu yang dibangkitkan adalah berkenaan dengan diskriminasi wanita semata-mata, maka ia adalah ultra vires atau berlawanan dengan peruntukan 8(2) dan adalah tidak sah. Tetapi, sekiranya satu alasan yang dihalang dengan tambahan satu lagi alasan lain, maka jaminan kesamarataan tersebut tidak boleh dibangkitkan. Contoh yang diberikan oleh beliau ialah berkenaan dengan undang-undang Rukun Tentanga yang mengecualikan wanita dalam rondaan malam. Menurutnya, oleh kerana alasan keselamatan yang merupakan tambahan kepada alasan jantina, maka jaminan perlembagaan Artikel 8(2) tidak boleh dibangkitkan.
Pada pandangan saya, usaha kerajaan meratifikasi CEDAW, pindaan Perlembagaan 2001 serta mewajibkan penyertaan remaja perempuan dalam PLKN merupakan langkah progresif yang mengiktiraf hak samarata lelaki dan perempuan di negara kita.
Cadangan pengecualian remaja perempuan dalam PLKN hanya akan mematahkan usaha kerajaan untuk meningkatkan taraf wanita. Ini adalah bertentangan dengan dasar kerajaan , polisi Bangsa-bangsa Besatu serta usaha para ahli feminis. Apa yang perlu diperbaiki dalam PLKN sebenarnya ialah kawalan disiplin dalam kem latihan dan juga logistik.
The essay is written in National Language.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Di sini saya ingin membuat tinjauan terhadap perundangan semasa di Malaysia untuk menentukan tahap kemajuan taraf wanita di negara ini.
Pada tahun 1995, Malaysia telah membuat ratifikasi terhadap Konvensyen Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu berkenaan Penghapusan Segala Bentuk Diskriminasi terhadap Wanita (The United Nations’ Convention On the Elimination of All Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)) . Negara-negara yang menandatangani Konvesyen ini mempunyai obligasi untuk mengambil langkah-langkah perundangan untuk menghapuskan segala bentuk diskriminasi terhadap wanita. Unjuran daripada ini, Parlimen Malaysia meluluskan pindaan Perlembagaan Malaysia dengan memasukkan perkataan jantina dalam konsep kesamarataan Perlembagaan. Perkembangan dalam hak kesamarataan ini sebenarnya merupakan komitmen kerajaan Malaysia terhadap konvesyen tersebut.
Sebelum pindaan 2001, Perlembagaan adalah senyap terhadap isu kesamarataan lelaki dan perempuan. Niat ini boleh dilihat dari undang-undang seperti Akta Khidmat Negara 1955 yang mengecualikan wanita dalam penyertaan khidmat negara. Sekali pandang, hujah Christine A. Littleton mendapat tempat di undang-undang pra-2001 di Malaysia.
Pindaan Perlembagaan Malaysia yang berlaku pada 2001 adalah memasukkan pengiktirafan terhadap kesamarataan lelaki dan perempuan dengan tambahan perkataan jantina dalam Artikel 8(2).
Untuk mendapat gambaran yang lebih jelas, Artikel 8(1) dan 8(2), 4(1) dan 160(2) Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia harus dibaca bersama.
Artikel 8(1) Perlembagaan Malaysia menyatakan:
“Semua orang adalah sama rata di sisi undang-undang dan berhak mendapat perlindungan yang sama rata di sisi undang-undang”
Selepas pindaan 2001, Artikel 8(2) berbunyi:
“Kecuali sebagaimana dibenarkan dengan nyatanya oleh perlembagaan ini, tidaklah boleh ada perbezaan terhadap warganegara semata-mata oleh sebab agama, kaum, keturunan tempat lahir atau jantina dalam mana-mana undang-undang atau dalam perlantikan bagi apa-apa jawatan atau pekerjaan di bawah sesuatu pihak berkuasa awam atau dalam pentadbiran mana-mana undang-undang berkenaan dengan memperolehi, memegang atau melepaskan harta atau berkenaan dengan menubuh atau menjalankan apa-apa tred, perniagaan, profesyen, vokesyen atau pekerjaan. ”
Artikel 4(1) Perlembagaan menyatakan:
“Perlembagaan ini adalah undang-undang utama Persekutuan dan apa-apa undang-undang yang diluluskan selepas Hari Merdeka dan yang berlawanan dengan Perlembagaan ini hendaklah terbatal setakat yang berlawanan itu.”
Hari Merdeka pula ditakrifkan di bawah Artikel 160(2) sebagai 31 Ogos tahun 1957.
Ini bermaksud, selepas kuatkuasanya pindaan Perlembagaan 2001, sebarang akta adalah tidak sah dan terbatal sekiranya peruntukan adalah berlawanan dengan Artikel 8(2) yang baru.
Berdasarkan tafsiran itu, Akta Program Khidmat Latihan Negara 2003 tidak membuat perbezaan antara jantina. Ini adalah jelas berbeza dengan klausa mewajibkan lelaki sahaja dalam Akta Khidmat Negara 1952. Kedudukan mewajiban lelaki sahaja di bawah Akta Khidmat Negara 1952 masih sah kerana ia diluluskan sebelum Hari Merdeka dan peruntukan Artikel 4(1) hanya terpakai ke atas undang-undang selepas Hari Merdeka.
Mahkamah Persekutuan telah berpeluang membuat tafsiran terhadap Artikel 8 Perlembagaan Persekutuan dalam kes PP v Khong Teng Khen . Mahkamah Persekutuan menyatakan Artikel 8 mengenakan kewajipan ke atas undang-undang untuk melayan orang yang sama dengan layanan yang sama dibawah keadaan yang sama. Artikel 8 tidak mewajibkan undang-undang untuk melayan orang yang sama dengan layanan yang sama di bawah semua keadaan. Artikel 8 menjamin seseorang dalam kelas yang sama harus dilayan dengan layanan yang sama dengan orang lain dengan kelas yang sama. Dalam aspek ini, menurut Mahkamah, Parlimen adalah dibenarkan untuk memasukkan klasifikasi perundangan seperti umur, pendapatan, profesion. Syarat klasifikasi tersebut ialah ia tidak boleh melanggar alasan yang dihalang oleh Artikel 8(2) dan mesti memenuhi piawaian kemunasabahan yang ditentukan oleh mahkamah.
Dr Shad Faruqi juga membuat satu permerhatian yang menarik berkenaan Artikel 8(2). Menurut beliau, Artikel 8(2) hanya menghalang diskriminasi dalam aspek agama, kaum, keturunan, tempat lahir atau jantina semata-mata. Sekiranya isu yang dibangkitkan adalah berkenaan dengan diskriminasi wanita semata-mata, maka ia adalah ultra vires atau berlawanan dengan peruntukan 8(2) dan adalah tidak sah. Tetapi, sekiranya satu alasan yang dihalang dengan tambahan satu lagi alasan lain, maka jaminan kesamarataan tersebut tidak boleh dibangkitkan. Contoh yang diberikan oleh beliau ialah berkenaan dengan undang-undang Rukun Tentanga yang mengecualikan wanita dalam rondaan malam. Menurutnya, oleh kerana alasan keselamatan yang merupakan tambahan kepada alasan jantina, maka jaminan perlembagaan Artikel 8(2) tidak boleh dibangkitkan.
Pada pandangan saya, usaha kerajaan meratifikasi CEDAW, pindaan Perlembagaan 2001 serta mewajibkan penyertaan remaja perempuan dalam PLKN merupakan langkah progresif yang mengiktiraf hak samarata lelaki dan perempuan di negara kita.
Cadangan pengecualian remaja perempuan dalam PLKN hanya akan mematahkan usaha kerajaan untuk meningkatkan taraf wanita. Ini adalah bertentangan dengan dasar kerajaan , polisi Bangsa-bangsa Besatu serta usaha para ahli feminis. Apa yang perlu diperbaiki dalam PLKN sebenarnya ialah kawalan disiplin dalam kem latihan dan juga logistik.
The website of KK High Court - a pleasant surprise
Today's Star carries the news on Justice Dato Ian Chin and his passion on IT.
Tech-savvy judges put trial notes on the web
I connected to the Kota Kinabalu High Court Page
and read his article titled "Just the Beginning". It was the address by the Judge delivered on the occasion of admitting advocates and solicitors.
I am humbled by his statement:
"As for knowledge of the law your qualifications should vouch for you but only to a certain extent. Let me remind you that the law is not the same all the time. Do not rest on your law degree. The law changes through legislation or through the interpretation of the court. It is important that you should not think that you can stop learning about the law. The law must be further and continuously learned and this you do by reading the law reports that contain the judgments of the courts not only of Malaysia but of other Commonwealth countries as well. Some will learn faster than others but the one who employs information technology will be miles ahead of the other who does not. So it is important that you be computer-literate. Most judgments are posted in the Internet within hours of pronouncement. Unless you are aware of the judgment and whether it affects or changes the law which, for example, you are about to advise a client or argue before a court, you will be as ignorant as the person who does not know any law. The law is not all that you have to further learn to be a good advocate. As mentioned earlier, there is also the affairs of men which you must be knowledgeable."
I am also pleasantly surprise to come across the notes of proceedings on the murder trial of Sabah Assistant Manager in KKHC website.
KKHC seems to be more sophiscated than their counterparts in the West Malaysia.
Tech-savvy judges put trial notes on the web
I connected to the Kota Kinabalu High Court Page
and read his article titled "Just the Beginning". It was the address by the Judge delivered on the occasion of admitting advocates and solicitors.
I am humbled by his statement:
"As for knowledge of the law your qualifications should vouch for you but only to a certain extent. Let me remind you that the law is not the same all the time. Do not rest on your law degree. The law changes through legislation or through the interpretation of the court. It is important that you should not think that you can stop learning about the law. The law must be further and continuously learned and this you do by reading the law reports that contain the judgments of the courts not only of Malaysia but of other Commonwealth countries as well. Some will learn faster than others but the one who employs information technology will be miles ahead of the other who does not. So it is important that you be computer-literate. Most judgments are posted in the Internet within hours of pronouncement. Unless you are aware of the judgment and whether it affects or changes the law which, for example, you are about to advise a client or argue before a court, you will be as ignorant as the person who does not know any law. The law is not all that you have to further learn to be a good advocate. As mentioned earlier, there is also the affairs of men which you must be knowledgeable."
I am also pleasantly surprise to come across the notes of proceedings on the murder trial of Sabah Assistant Manager in KKHC website.
KKHC seems to be more sophiscated than their counterparts in the West Malaysia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)