|
Article 121(1): Person responsible must explain |
|
|
|
|
Saturday, 19 July 2008 10:51am |
|
©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.
|