Listen to soft instrumental music for 15 to 20 mins before bed to calm the emotions and have a restful night . . .
With first suit still in court, Musa Aman sues Sabah governor for dissolving assembly – Read more: https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2020/08/06/with-first-suit-still-in-court-musa-aman-sues-sabah-governor-for-dissolving/1891570
Being dragged to justice means being taken to court.
Seeking justice means going to court.
The reality is the court is not about justice, ethics, moral values, theology, sin, God or truth.
The court is only about law.
The gazette on the dissolution of the Sabah state assembly comes to mind.
The gazette itself probably cannot be challenged. A gazette is not law but merely a gov’t announcement.
It may only be possible to challenge the process of gazetting.
If the gov’t has followed procedures — i.e. it’s own procedures — the court will deny Application for leave to initiate judicial review.
If leave is granted nevertheless, the judicial review will be thrown out.
In Malaysia, unlike in England, the court will not consider whether there has been procedural unfairness.
It will only focus on whether procedures have been complied with.
If procedures have not been complied with, the court has to consider the merits of the Application.
In England, the court will go into the merits of the Application, whether procedures have been complied with or otherwise.
The court will also consider whether the procedures have been fair.
It’s almost impossible to win judicial reviews in Malaysia. I can only think of The Edge, from recent memory, which won a judicial review Application before GE14.
In the Jill Ireland Allah case, after having dealt with the Herald’s Allah case, the Federal Court declined to rule.
It advised the Home Minister to settle the matter with the Applicant.
If the parties in dispute fail to settle the issue/s in conflict, it’s not clear whether the Federal Court will come in.
Since the Federal Court went into the merits of the Herald’s Allah Application, I could have demolished the court’s argument from the Ananda Marg case from Calcutta, India.
The use of Allah by Christians in Borneo has been integral to their faith for hundreds of years.
The court itself conceded it can’t get into theology. So, on what basis can the court tell anyone what he or she should not call his or her God?
The court also fell back on the public security argument. This is just a fig leaf.
Some incidents, about five or six, were created just before the court case. One of these cases was at a Sikh temple in Miri.
Sikhs use Allah for God.
Having said that, the Federal Court upheld only the Home Ministry’s prohibition on using the term Allah with reference to Christianity in Malay print in the Herald.
There’s no prohibition on Christians using Allah for God in worship, prayer, hymn and dance.
The Sikhs continue to use Allah in print for God. So, it’s against the law — Article 8 — to discriminate against Christians.
Jill Ireland was about her bringing in five or six Christian tapes from Sumatra. Apparently, they contain the word Allah with reference to Christianity.
The Home Minister and so-called Melayu in Malaya are not only very childish but very stupid.
They forget that, not so long ago, they were outcaste/casteless Hindu in their previous faith and Buddhist.
It was CJ Richard Malanjum who reminded lawyers and the judiciary, in a farewell speech, that letter of the law alone is not the sum total of the rule of law, the basis of the Constitution.
Besides the letter of the law, the rule of law also includes the spirit of the law, with greater emphasis on the latter.
Read further here . . .
Perak case law irrelevant in the appointment of CM immediately after snap election, it must be based on SPR List.
[06/08, 8:32 p.m.] SL:
MA can win kah, how joe
[06/08, 8:43 p.m.] JF:
Focus on whether whoever is appointed CM will have the largest number of seats under his symbol in the state assembly.
Otherwise, the appointment will end up in court.
The Definition of majority in the Sabah Constitution refers. It’s not about simple majority, does not exclude minority gov’t.
[06/08, 8:53 p.m.] JF:
Judicial review? Not in Malaysia.
In England, can. MA can cite CV-19 as special circumstances.
[06/08, 8:59 p.m.] SL:
So now election go ahead la.. but y MA adamant n waste time n money 💰
[06/08, 9:39 p.m.] JF:
The Governor said he did not receive the 33 SDs and also MA did not seek an audience with him.
Apparently, only SA sought an audience with the Governor.
According to media reports, MA went to the Istana before July 30 to seek an audience.
He was reportedly stopped at a roundabout near the Istana and not allowed to proceed further.
The Governor must have known about the 33 SDs.
Two Federal Ministers met the Governor, according to media reports, and briefed him on the developing political situation. Two Ministers means there was a Witness.
Under the law, Article 8, there can be no discrimination.
12 May 2018 and the situation just before 30 July 2020 were similar.
[06/08, 9:52 p.m.] JF:
No court will consider conspiracy theories.
The system in Malaysia is first past the post.
BN with 29 had the largest number of seats under ONE symbol on 10 May 2018 as per the SPR List.
Read the Sabah Constitution.
Read further here . . .
This comes after my blog piece that it’s difficult to win judicial review cases in Malaysia. Alhamdulillah. Allahuakhbar.