Wednesday, August 13, 2014

"Khalid-icised" The Lawyers

From Khalid's refusal to step down, initiate legal proceeding against online media, The Malaysian Insider to sacking 5 State EXCO from holding office, the arena has now moved to politicising lawyers by launching baseless personal remark against professionalism of a member of the Bar.

Edmund Bon Tai Soon and New Sin Yew who have represented the independent Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim were accused by two politician lawyers, N. Surendran and Latheefa Koya on assaulting freedom of press, after both Bon and New have accepted the brief from TSKI to sue The Malaysian Insider. According to TSKI's claim, Malaysian Insider has uttered defamatory articles/statements against TSKI, including but not limited to the issues of Kidex, revision of MB & EXCO's allowance, etc.

(Picture taken from Malaysiakini)

YB N. Surendran and Latheefa Koya being part and parcel of PKR, criticised Bon and New incompetent and unprincipled in taking the brief, simply because TSKI has been sacked by PKR and no longer a person that the party like anymore. Following such line of argument, due to TSKI's stubbornness to abide by the party's instruction, he is now a bad guy. And lawyers shouldn't help a bad guy.

Both YB Surendran and Latheefa are practising advocates & solicitors. Though they are politician lawyers, they should appreciate the cab-rank rule better than anyone else. 

Rule 2 of Legal Profession (Practice & Etiquette) Rules 1978 observes, an advocate & solicitor shall accept brief except in justifiable circumstances. This is also known as the Cab-Rank Rule. Cab-Rank Rule is a shorthand of professional obligation to accept brief upon instruction of client regardless of any personal dislike.

It is like a cabbie waiting for customer in a taxi waiting station. He cannot refuse to carry passenger except in limited circumstances. 

Likewise, being an advocate & solicitor, professionalism remains, perception aside. I see no cogent reasons why Bon and New should not accept TSKI's brief, merely because TSKI refused to follow PKR's leadership and caused the chaos among the Pakatan Rakyat as well as "malfunctioned" the state government. If Bon and New refused the brief by observing own political agenda and perception - that TSKI is wrong in not stepping down as MB, then they are lack of professionalism.

Put the defamatory suit aside first.

December 2012, a 23 year old student was brutally gang-raped by 6 people and died much later. The Indian Bar then refused to represent the accused, due to the serious gravity of the alleged crime, but also because the solicitors faced hostility when acting for them. To then, the Bar Council (India) urged the Indian Bar to end its refusal as everyone will be presumed innocent until proven guilty, including the 6 gang-rape accused. 

To put further, the presence of an advocate & solicitor is to defend the system. Clients come and go, but system would not vanish. Democracy cannot survive if lawyers who provide legal assistance can be simply condemned and intimidated into boycotting a person's right to be represented because of public criticism.

Emotional, political perception and morality must be differentiated from professional conduct. Read the scenario properly. TSKI gives instruction, lawyers accept the brief and file suit on behalf. Who is the client? TSKI. If you want to allege assault on freedom of press, point your finger to the client but not the lawyers.

This is where political belief overrides professional practice and pride. 

Khalid-icised the lawyers would not uphold own political visions, but personal attack do. 

Know your target well before pulling the trigger.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

雪州大臣风波:严重的法律后果

雪州撤换大臣风波越演越烈,从实权领袖安华于午夜召开记者会宣布大臣替代人选到现在,卡立似乎不愿就范,导致民联伊斯兰党内部开明与保守派的分裂加剧,以及民联三党内异中求同的合作关系也蒙受波及。按照目前的局势看来,决定权并不是落在即将于8月10日召开中委会会议的伊斯兰党手中,而是卡立一人本身。

因此,我们必须对我国奉行的君主立宪制拥有一些法律概念。

西敏寺国会制(Westminster Parliamentary System)
我国引用的国会立法制源自于英国西敏寺,即国会本身被归分成三大部分,分别为最高元首,下议院与上议院。其次,我国各州的立法议会,即州议会也沿用相同的制度。因此,在州立法会内,州苏丹的角色可以在一定的程度上与国会内的最高元首相提并论。

在西敏寺制度底下,或正确来说,君主立宪制底下,最高元首/州苏丹并不能直接干预三权分立,特别以行政权为主。但是,我国的联邦宪法/州宪法却无异的为最高元首/州苏丹赋予特定的权力,而其中包括如何钦点首相/州务大臣。

雪州风波
首先,我们必须明白的是,马来西亚不奉行总统选举制,因此我国的首相/州务大臣是在政党/政治联盟于选举中获得最多席位而被推举的人选,尔后可向最高元首/州苏丹表明他(即他所代表的政党/政治联盟)获得人民的委托并成功赢取多数席位,进而可宣誓成为首相/州务大臣。而这也表示,首相/州务大臣是在政党/政治联盟的内部同意下被推举的。

从民主的角度来看,首相/州务大臣是绝对可以被所委托的政党/政治联盟撤换而不得有异议。因此,公正党在宣布决定撤换卡立的时候,卡立不得不走。这绝对是一个政治决定,也符合我国奉行的民主制。

翻阅雪州宪法,第53(6)条文如是表示,倘若卡立已不再获得多数州立法议员的支持,除非州苏丹在卡立的要求下同意解散州议会,否则卡立必须总辞。(英文为he shall tender the resignation of the State Executive Council)。按照第53(6)条文直译,卡立必须带领州行政议会(State EXCO)呈辞。

然而,纵然雪州宪法如是表示,但是该州宪法却没有具体的阐明该如何推选出新的州务大臣。因此,雪州宪法第51条文阐明,州苏丹必须依据宪法规定的要求委任州务大臣,其中包括他必须是一名马来人以及信奉伊斯兰教。当然,第53(2)(a)条文也阐明州苏丹在委任一名州务大臣之际,该人选必须获得多数州立法议员的支持。

(一)卡立主动呈辞
如上述表示,卡立是关键性人物,倘若卡立主动呈辞,这将能有效的解决所有风波。而民联三党推举的人选也将能成为雪州第二任民联大臣。

(二)解散州立法议会
这项决定可以引起百般涟漪,而又以霹雳州当年宪政危机相似。如果州苏丹同意解散州议会是好,相反的,倘若雪州苏丹和已驾崩的前霹雳州苏丹般的拒绝解散州议会,那么这将引发新一轮的州宪政危机,情况则恰恰与霹雳州相似,因为州苏丹拒绝解散州议会可被诠释为干预三权分立,支持派也可辩驳这是州宪法赋予苏丹的权力。

虽然霹雳州宪政危机已让我们有案例可循,但这将可能引发新一轮的司法拉锯战,届时且看联邦法院的裁决。

(三)不信任动议
不信任动议是民主制下的其中一项重要武器,虽然公正党相关人士连日内炮轰卡立,但相信安华必须等待伊斯兰党的中委会会议后才能决定是否该发动不信任动议的策略,逼使卡立下台。

(四)卡立遭公正党开除
这也是一个变化多端的选项。如果公正党真的采取开除行动,卡立可以循例要求召开州议会并提呈信任动议。如果伊斯兰党与巫统联手(如之前媒体报导),那么卡立是有可能成为一名联合州政府的州务大臣。虽然可能性不大,但还是存在的。

当然,也许许多人不知的是,假如雪州陷入社会动荡,中央政府是有权力介入并接管州政府,而戒严也可是其中一项后果最严重的选项。

(照片取自辣手新闻网)

卡立从安华召开的记者会后已明确的表明,他并不是不同意下台,而是一切必须按照法律程序进行。要一州之长下台也不是一朝一夕的事。直至截稿为止,媒体在卡立出席一项法庭案件审讯后报导,卡立仍希望所有撤换大臣的事务能按照原有的次序和法律进行安排。

一切且看卡立,这句话一点也没错。

Friday, August 1, 2014

日落洞之虎:卡巴星

阔别抒写部落已有一段时间,这次选择以介绍一本书籍作为开端,它是Tiger of Jelutong, Karpal Singh。作者是Tim Donoghue,一名因机缘巧合而结识了这名日落洞之虎的新西兰媒体工作者。

相信令许多在政坛和法律界的人士感到惊讶和伤心的是,卡巴星于2014年4月17日从吉隆坡驱车前往北部时因一起致命车祸而不幸丧命,陪伴他的还有一直默默在他身边服务的好朋友,Michael。这本书籍也因此成了其中一本记载卡巴星生前在法律与司法界所作出的贡献和点滴,内容主要围绕在卡巴星处理过的案件,包括那些曾经在1950年内安法令(Internal Security Act 1950)(已被现任首相废除)底下被逮捕的人士。



卡巴星生前家境贫困,只身前往新加坡就读法律系已展现出其卓越的敏锐度,更因发动与参与学生联合会而在李光耀的指示下遭大学停学。大学毕业后,卡巴星回马并在亚罗士打的一间律师事务所实习后,开始执业生涯。其间,卡巴星在实习完毕后,在欲向高庭申请宣誓成为律师之际更遭到一位资深律师的反对,原因为害怕卡巴星在将来会比他更出色。然而,高庭法官Justice Ong Hock Sim在聆听卡巴星的陈词后命令卡巴星宣誓成为律师。

卡巴星在执业的生涯初段为马来西亚的法律作出了巨大的贡献,包括为那些在内安法令低下被检察署提控的人士,分别有共产党党羽嫌犯和拥有枪械的人士担当起辩护的角色。

也许你会质疑为何一名律师会为犯罪人士辩护,因为法律存在的其中一个意义就是要惩罚罪犯,特别是在那个时候的共产党党羽。作为一名法律体系维护者,律师的辩护工作主要在于维护司法公正,而不是绞尽脑汁如何替嫌犯洗脱嫌疑。当然,在维护司法体系的当儿,律师铁定会从多方角度出发,包括质疑和挑战法令的合法性,执法当局是否有按照法律程序行事等。通常也可称技术性胜诉。

书籍其中一部令人感觉到津津有味的是,卡巴星在处理一名在内安法令底下被提控的嫌犯之际,虽然Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975的其中一条条文阐明嫌犯不可上诉至英国蓲密法院(Privy Council-共和联邦体制下最高上诉法院,现已被马来西亚Courts of Judicature Act撤除),但卡巴星却成功从联邦法院取得上诉准令,并将案件带至伦敦蓲密法院,促成他成为其中一名拥有在英国蓲密法院辩护案件经验的律师。

卡巴星了解到,虽然他获得英国蓲密法院众法官们的支持,以致推翻了联邦法院的裁决(意即嫌犯不被处死),但时任的联邦政府却能轻易的在国会内通过法案推翻蓲密法院的裁决。于是,卡巴星认为在法庭内并不能最有效的维护法律公正,因此才展开了他在行动党的政治生涯,通过社会运动与政治动力进行改革。当中包括联合英国与国际社运组织推动废除死刑与恶法运动。

若要详细阅读其余内容,可前往各大书局或现在正于KL Convention Centre举行的书展购买。