YOURSAY 'I don't know if Nazri is in contempt of court. But certainly he is guilty of being stupid. Can he be charged for that too?'
Law minister: UUCA 'still law' despite court decision
Joker: What an absurd statement from our pathetic excuse for a de-facto law minister. I am not legally trained but I do have common sense, something which I think is in short supply within our legislative assembly.
Malaysian courts is based on the common law system and as such legal precedence, i.e. past judgments, plays a critical role in determining how future judgments of similar circumstances will be made.
If the Court of Appeal now states that the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) is unconstitutional, then that is what future judgments will follow unless it is overturned by a higher court.
So, say in future other students are charged under the UUCA given that the Umno ministers still consider it as a valid law, the court will find them not guilty as it had already ruled that the UUCA unconstitutional. So the offenders go free. Isn't such an exercise pointless and a waste of money?
I really wonder how will Nazri fare if he were to take the CLP (Certificate in Legal Practice) exam.
Multi Racial: A law minister who don't understand the law? The Court of Appeal has ruled that section 15(5) of the UUCA is unconstitutional. This means unless this is challenged at the higher court, section 15(5) is not applicable.
Paul Warren: What kind of law did Minister in the PM's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz study?
As it stands, students can be involved in politics. This is already decided by the Court of Appeal after it dismissed the case against the students. This sets a precedent that can only be set aside by the Federal Court which, of course knowing our judiciary and the way they dance to Umno's tune, is just a matter of time.
Until that time, the decision of the appellate court stays.
I don't know if Nazri was in contempt of court. But certainly he is guilty of being stupid. Can he be charged for that too?
Hello: The minister is going against the verdict of the Court of Appeal by claiming that the relevant section is still valid.
I wonder how he managed to get his law degree. It must be a fluke for him to have passed his examination. There is no debating with this kind of arrogant attitude. And this kind of attitude is common among the Umno-BN crowd.
Anonymous: Hello Minister, where did you study your law? I don't think what the judge decided is an ‘obiter dictum', which in Latin means a remark made which does not form part of the decision.
I am not a lawyer nor have I read the decision, but it appears that the judges have decided on the matter.
Please enlighten me where did the judges made an ‘obiter dictum' (remark or mention by way) in their decision?
Tailek: I wonder if he has a genuine law degree. The court has interpreted the law and until and unless the Federal Court rules otherwise, the decision of the Court of Appeal is good and binding law.
Perhaps the Court of Appeal can cite our law minister for contempt of court or maybe senior law cum MP Karpal Singh can move the court to punish Nazri.
Ferdtan: I am no lawyer but I think the law minister is wrong to say that UUCA is still law in spite of the ruling by the court.
What does he mean by the statement that it is just 'obiter ductum' (an opinion in passing) of the court? The court has passed a judgment. It was a clear decision and the court was not expressing an opinion on it.
Lim Chong Leong: Nazri is flaunting his ignorance of the law again. Parliament makes laws while the courts interpret them, and if they find that any of the laws made are unconstitutional, then these laws are declared unlawful.
The UUCA is therefore no longer law because the constitution reigns supreme and it is deemed unconstitutional.
Bender: Oh, now Nazri is talking about separation of power? Since when there is such a thing as separation of power in this God-forsaken country?
All this while when court decisions are in line with their crooked ways, there's no need to separate the powers, but when the court judgment slaps them in the face, then all of the sudden, voila, there's the separation.
Seriously, it is truly a disgrace for Malaysia to have such a character as the law minister.
Anonymous_417c: Nazri's comment gives one the impression that the BN government does not give a damn to what the court has decided on UUCA. He should be pro-active to rectify what is obviously wrong.
Senior Citizen: Listen all Malaysians, young and old, this is a clear announcement by our law minister that in this country there is no such thing as the judiciary being there to ensure justice.
Instead, the judiciary is a law onto itself, set up to execute the demands and commands of the executive in this country - that of BN and Umno. It is as simple as that.
The judiciary is merely a front to appease the people and the world. They let the lower courts to do what suits them based on the spirit of justice and fairness. But anything not to the likes of BN or Umno is ensured that it be reversed by the higher courts.
Anonymous: Nazri's ignorant remarks mean that politicians like him believe that they have the final say.
Politicians are therefore above the law. It is then logical to conclude that these elected representatives of the people are not law abiding.
If he speaks on behalf of the government as the law minister, we can justifiably conclude that our present government is not law abiding. What kind of a government is this?
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.