Copyright Notice

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the author, at the address below.

Sakmongkol ak 47

Friday 9 September 2022

Leak of draft judgment issue.

1. What if the alleged leaks in the draft documents are false? Intended to cast doubts on the final judgments?

2. They are, but, creative manufactures of apparatchiks aligned to the biddings of their paymasters?

3. They are just propaganda fodder served to the unthinking chattering class.

4.the chattering class consists of the wailing pakciks and makciks, the panas barans, the commuters on the Clapham omnibus and the mrt, leisure housewives sipping latte and the smoked salmon socialists drinking at the Selangor club.

5. If the leaks are only of propagandistic value, ie deliberately created so as to form a certain public opinion, they should accordingly be treated flippantly.

6. But suspend our judgment for the time being and accept that the leaks are true. What of it?

7. At the onset, let us be aware that the leaked material are draft judgments, not the final and proofread.

8. Our quarrel with the leakage seems to rest on the untenable assumption, that the leakage will be prejudicial to the justice due to the litigant.

9. The leakage is an untenable assumption because such a leakage, does not go to the root of the verdict. It does not affect the guilt or innocence of the litigant.

10. We are angry with the leakage, believing that if some people know of the verdict beforehand, it will injure or compromised the verdict.

11. How could they influence the outcome of the verdict? As professor Godbole in a passage to India says, the outcome is already written in the stars.

12. Members of the public must be able to distinguish between the leakage, draft and final judgment. We are angry at the leakage, and rightly so. The verdict is unchangeable.

13. The leakage can only mean there are dishonest people in the judgment trail.

14. I believe, judges take notes, make notes, asked research officers to look up relevant case laws to affirm or rebut legal counsels submissions and so on.

15. These are passed on to court clerks who operate the word processors and research officers or other relevant workers. The leaks occur between them.

16. So ask pdrm or sprm to investigate these people instead of shouting our heads off at an imagined travesty of justice. If the culprits are caught, send them to jail and fine them in an exemplary amount.


  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP