A judge in the Kuala Lumpur High Court has decided that there is no need for him to review his ruling to impose a reduced fine of RM2,000 on Batu MP Tian Chua.

NONE Justice Ghazali Cha (right) said that, as he has stepped down (functus officio) , the decision on the fine stands.

Functus officio is a Latin term. It means that once the judge has stepped down, he is seen as having completed his duty and hence, cannot recall or review the case.

Usually, too, such matters cannot be reviewed unless an appeal is made.

According to Chua's lawyer Ranjit Singh, the judge maintained that his intention is clear - that he does not want a by-election to be called for the Batu parliamentary seat in Kuala Lumpur.

Ranjit also said the judge is aware of the Supreme Court decision in PP vs Leong Ying Ming (1993) drug case, in the context of defining a fine of 'not less than RM2,000'.

“We maintain the Leong Ying Ming decision is correct and the judge feels the same way,” he said.

In the case, Supreme Court judge Justice Gunn Chit Tuan had ruled that the phrase 'not less than five years' would mean at least five years and one day.

“..We are of the view that the words used are clear and that the words 'punishable with imprisonment for more than five years' mean imprisonment from five years and one day upwards up to imprisonment for life,” he wrote.

“Then when we turn to Section 39A(2) (of the Dangerous Drugs Act), we consider that the words 'be punished with imprisonment for life or for the term which shall not be less than five years' are also clear and unequivocal and mean that the offence is punishable with imprisonment for more than five years - i.e. five years and one day up to a maximum of imprisonment for life.”

Last October, the Kuala Lumpur Magistrate's Court had found Chua guilty of biting the arm of a police constable while being arrested at a protest three years ago near the Parliament building.

tian chua arrested The PKR politician, who was elected Batu MP in 2008, was charged under Section 332 of the Penal Code, with intentionally causing injury to a police constable on duty.

He was sentenced to six months in jail and a fine of RM3,000. On appeal, the High Court upheld the conviction last Thursday, but reduced his fine to RM2,000 or two months' jail in default.

Status ‘still solid’

Chua told reporters this morning that he is still Batu MP.

"I will serve my constituents and will go to Parliament after this," he said after his lawyers and the prosecutors met the judge in chambers.

The meeting was to clarify whether the ruling would effectively disqualify Chua as a MP, based on Article 48 of the federal constitution.

Many lawyers had argued that Chua would have to vacate his parliamentary seat and said he would be banned from contesting a seat for five years.

azlan Article 48 says that, if a MP has been convicted by a court of law and faces a jail term of not less than one year or a fine of not less than RM2,000, he or she will be automatically disqualified and a by-election must be called.

Central to the issue is the interpretation of the definition of 'not less than RM2,000'.

Chua was represented by Ranjit, Amer Hamzah Arshad and Razlan Hadri Zulkifli. The prosecutors were led by DPPs Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria and Lee Keng Fatt.

Ranjit said Chua's status as MP is ‘solid’, as the name Batu suggests.

The lawyer also said the only person who can challenge Chua's status are the Dewan Rakyat speaker, the Election Commission or Chua himself.

amer hamzah arshad Amer Hamzah (left) said he does not know whether an appeal will be filed, saying further instructions would be sought from Chua.

DPP Mohd Hanafiah refused to divulge details of the meeting with the judge, and would not indicate whether the prosecution would appeal the reduced sentence.

Chua's legal team has 14 days from last Thursday to appeal the conviction. It must first gain leave (permission) to file the appeal, as there is no automatic right to appeal.

In addition, an appeal before the Court of Appeal would have to be on points of law and not on the sentence.

Chua maintains innocence

Met in the Parliament lobby later, Chua maintained his innocence and said the interpretation of ‘not less than RM2,000' would mean that the amount must be higher than RM2,000.

“If anyone is not satisfied, they can challenge the decision,” he told journalists.

He was also asked to comment on the case of PP vs Fan Yew Teng .

Fan, a former DAP MP for Menglembu, was fined RM2,000 upon being convicted of sedition. A motion was then tabled in the Dewan Rakyat to disqualify him.

NONE “He was unfairly, unjustifiably removed by the speaker. It was illegal. So I do not think any illegal or unjustifiable case should be used as a reference,” Chua (left) said.

He also insisted that the finding of guilt in his own case is wrong.

“There was no bite and it is very clear from the evidence that the incident did not take place.

"Any MP or social activist who challenges the authorities will always face such hazards (and) threats. We should not be afraid of speaking out. (If we are), the law (would have) achieved its objective of frightening the people.

"The issue is (that) the system must change with the removal of draconian laws such as the Internal Security Act or (the) RM2,000 fine (as these are) a hindrance to a democratic society. That is why Pakatan Rakyat is fighting for change.

“We are not going to be silent just because we are going to lose our seats. The point is that the people (have) put their trust in us and (have given) us a mandate to speak out, (to) fight for justice and be the voice of the people.”

VIDEO | 2 mins

 

Related story: Batu by-election: BN nervous, says PAS' Khalid