Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©New Straits Times (Used by permission)
by Mohd Sheriff, Petaling Jaya

AFTER reading Prof Salleh Buang's letter ("Just who was behind that amendment move in 1988?" -- NST, July 4), I have been eagerly waiting to see in the same medium a reaction or comment from the person "whose anger led to the amendment of Article 121 (1) two decades ago".

I am sure those in the legal fraternity can identify who the writer meant, although his name was not mentioned.

What surprises me is why the person concerned has not owned up.

This is clearly a case of baling batu, sembunyi tangan (throw a stone and hide your hand) and let someone else take the rap.

Having read the chronology of events outlined by Salleh, I am convinced that the 1988 amendment was the sole legislative initiative of the then public prosecutor who was at the same time the attorney-general.

I believe it is about time this individual came out with a valid explanation as to how and why he did what he did.

That is the only way to vindicate Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for the blame levelled at him by most people, including those in the legal profession.

While I applaud the current move to amend Article 121(1) in order to restore to the judiciary the power taken away from it in 1988, I would like to urge the government to also amend Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution which provides absolute discretion to the attorney-general "to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for any offence other than proceedings before the syariah court, a native court or a court martial".

Obviously, this is giving too much power to the attorney-general, which is open to abuse.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed