P. Waytha Moorthy’s Sedition at Court of Appeal. Vindictive UMNOs’ AG directs DPP to do Double Jeopardy. Independent Sessious Judge in Jeopardy.
P. Uthayakumar and his lawyer Manoharan Malayalam were in Court at 8.30 a.m.
At about 10.55 p.m this case was called up. Mr Manoharan Malayalam introduced the other lawyers R. Kengatharan and Gobind Singh Deo who also represented V. Ganabathirao the third accused. Court of Appeal Judge Suriyadi Halim Omar asked why P. Uthayakumar and V. Ganabatirau were in the dock and then remarked that “if they are comfortable in the dock then it is all right”.
Manoharan Malayalam submitted that the appeal papers were not in order as he himself was detained under the ISA on 13/12/2007 when the Notice of Appeal was filed in Court.
Presumably under the vindictive and malicious UMNO Attorney General and the Attorney General’s chambers instructions, Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPP) Hanafiah and Farizul did not want to state their non objections to P. Waytha Moorty and the others appeal. Had the DPP not objected, the appeal would have been allowed and in particular this Second Sedition charge against P. Uthayakumar would come to an end. But it is plain and obvious that this UMNOs’ Attorney General intends Double Jeopardy (punishment twice for the same offence) and in fact Triple Jeopardy in the case of P. Uthayakumar by having served 514 days under the ISA and two more Sedition charges pending and hanging over his head. After all P. Uthayakumar in particular had already served his 514 days (about 1 1/2 years) jail sentence without charge or conviction under the ISA among others also for this Sedition charge (arising from Klang Court and the other from the K.L Court).
This matter was adjourned to 10/5/2010 for Hearing to have the papers in order.
In the interim our thoughts and sympathies lie with Puan Noraida, the former Sessions Court Judge in Klang in 2007 who had heard and merely acted as an Independent Judge who had dismissed the charges against this trio for being groundless further to Section 173(g) of the Criminal Procedure Code. But she was in turn almost immediately thereafter removed from the bench in what we see as retaliation for her non kow-towing to the UMNO ruling elite. She was then prosecuted for an unknown and unheard of criminal offence. UMNOs’ Independence of the Judiciary?
25/03/10
P. Uthayakumar and his lawyer Manoharan Malayalam were in Court at 8.30 a.m.
At about 10.55 p.m this case was called up. Mr Manoharan Malayalam introduced the other lawyers R. Kengatharan and Gobind Singh Deo who also represented V. Ganabathirao the third accused. Court of Appeal Judge Suriyadi Halim Omar asked why P. Uthayakumar and V. Ganabatirau were in the dock and then remarked that “if they are comfortable in the dock then it is all right”.
Manoharan Malayalam submitted that the appeal papers were not in order as he himself was detained under the ISA on 13/12/2007 when the Notice of Appeal was filed in Court.
Presumably under the vindictive and malicious UMNO Attorney General and the Attorney General’s chambers instructions, Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPP) Hanafiah and Farizul did not want to state their non objections to P. Waytha Moorty and the others appeal. Had the DPP not objected, the appeal would have been allowed and in particular this Second Sedition charge against P. Uthayakumar would come to an end. But it is plain and obvious that this UMNOs’ Attorney General intends Double Jeopardy (punishment twice for the same offence) and in fact Triple Jeopardy in the case of P. Uthayakumar by having served 514 days under the ISA and two more Sedition charges pending and hanging over his head. After all P. Uthayakumar in particular had already served his 514 days (about 1 1/2 years) jail sentence without charge or conviction under the ISA among others also for this Sedition charge (arising from Klang Court and the other from the K.L Court).
This matter was adjourned to 10/5/2010 for Hearing to have the papers in order.
In the interim our thoughts and sympathies lie with Puan Noraida, the former Sessions Court Judge in Klang in 2007 who had heard and merely acted as an Independent Judge who had dismissed the charges against this trio for being groundless further to Section 173(g) of the Criminal Procedure Code. But she was in turn almost immediately thereafter removed from the bench in what we see as retaliation for her non kow-towing to the UMNO ruling elite. She was then prosecuted for an unknown and unheard of criminal offence. UMNOs’ Independence of the Judiciary?
25/03/10
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment