YOURSAY ‘As John Malott said, ‘Name a country that agrees with the judgment.’
Action awaits those who tarnish judiciary
JD Lovrenciear: What is 'social media'? It is a platform for society to express their views. You need no "facts". Where there are facts, legal redress is the avenue. So why all these threats of taking action?
If that is the option, then do we ever realise how many thousands, if not millions, of perceptions expressed in the social media every day, every second, will have to face action?
Let us be reasonable, proactive and learn how to manage the World Wide Web with sense and direction. You have all the official as well as traditional media working hard at correcting perceptions.
Taking action on social media users will snowball to your disadvantage eventually. Perhaps a crash course on the workings of psychology, the use of social media and how first world countries are managing it to their advantage might be the right thing to pursue.
Wg321: Before the existence of social media, only law students and lawyers scrutinise court judgments. Today everybody is so well-connected that a layperson will be able to scrutinise a court judgement in minute details.
Even before Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria finished reading his judgment, I already knew that Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim would be found guilty by just following the minute-by-minute updates on Malaysiakini .
If Justice Arifin does not like laypersons like me to scrutinise his judgment, better put it under the Official Secrets Act.
Odin: All right, Arifin Zakaria, nice speech. Now, perhaps you might like to explain why Abdul Razak Baginda was acquitted without his defence being called. He was, after all, the main suspect in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder according to a former IGP (inspector-general of police).
Also explain why the sitting judges at a recent case went on turbo-boost to pass their judgment. You know which one.
These two instances of subnormal occurrences are sufficient. If the public is satisfied with your explanation, doubtless it will polish the judiciary's mirror to glint and sparkle.
Commentable: "Not only must justice be done; it must also be seen to be done." The judiciary must be very familiar with this maxim, as even a non-law student knows it well.
Whether justice is truly served or not, it is a matter for the people to judge. To dismiss the voices of the people and to demand respect instead does not bode well with an institution that by right shouldn't need to explain itself.
Milosevic: When the Singapore courts bankrupted many opposition politicians, the government meted out harsh punishments to those who dared to criticise the judiciary.
Now Malaysians, judge for yourself how independent the Singapore judiciary is. When an institution does protest too much, especially one led by blatantly corrupt and ineffective governmental officials as in Malaysia, everyone should smell a rat.
The few outstanding judges in Malaysia's past did not last long. Instead third-rate thinkers, those who don't even know basic logic and are shameless about their one-sided judicial executions are put in the highest levels of the judiciary.
Their role is obvious to all. They will not be able to withstand the slightest cross-examination by a 10-year-old, so they have no choice but to punish critics because Malaysians are meant to accept all the garbage in silence.
Not Confused: CJ, you can make as many threats as you like. It makes no difference, as we have heard it all before. The vast majority of Malaysians with any common sense didn't believe it in the past, and they don’t believe it now.
It’s not only Malaysians who are incredulous at the actions of the judiciary, and the culpability of the discredited BN government, it is also the international community and many, many revered politicians, legal opinion and others, some of whom observed the shenanigans first hand in courtrooms.
The conviction of Anwar is a total travesty of justice and Malaysia will forever reap the results of their disgusting attempts at silencing the political opposition here.
You can rant and rave as much as you and your disgraced colleagues in and out of the government like, you will never, ever live this infamy down.
Guna Otak: I wonder why the CJ is so concerned about the people criticising the trial if the judges have delivered a fair judgment.
Can't you stand a bit of criticism if you have a clear conscience? Or, have you learnt something from the IGP recently?
FellowMalaysian: Before CJ Arifin Zakaria gets carried away by his emotive outburst against 'unfounded criticisms', he should perhaps equipped himself with an open mind and rationalise the veracity of such criticisms and condemnations of Anwar's verdict instead of outrightly dismissing them.
It has been pointed out that not even one foreign newspaper, or human rights organisation or legal watchdogs the world over has any good word for his judgment.
Instead, major newspapers like The New York Times and Washington Post has openly condemned the verdict as being morally reprehensible, farcical as well as a travesty of justice.
Such major authoritative publications are read by businessmen all over, including potential investors.
Instead of taking on minions like those who vent their opinions through the social media, I call upon the CJ to take the bull by its horns and address the issue where it matters most to the country's economy and its future.
Hmmmmmmmm: In the words of former United States ambassador to Malaysia John Malott, "Name a country that agrees with the judgment". The whole world cannot be wrong.
CJ, explain appeal court’s speed in sodomy verdict
In era of social media, credibility must be earned
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 .
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.
