by Ganesh Sahathevan
The Hon. Judicial Commissioner Roz Mawar Rozain
THE SON of Australian grandmother Annapuranee Jenkins, whose partial remains were found scattered n Penang some four years ago, has vowed to continue seeking justice for her after yet another setback in the Malaysian courts over a case that has moved into its eighth year.
Steven Greg Jenkins said that he will consult his Malaysian lawyers with a mind to appeal the decision of the Kuala Lumpur High Court, which ruled on technicalities that a negligence suit filed by him against a developer and site project manager was unjustifiable.
Jenkins filed the suit last year, through his counsel Sankara Nair, where the plaintiff named the federal government, the police, Berjaya Land, its project manager Terrence Theseira and landscape worker Kew Kee Seng as defendants.
On February 26, Judicial Commissioner Roz Mawar Rozain ruled on technical grounds that Jenkins did not have a legal right to file the lawsuit without obtaining permission from his late mother's estate first.
Roz elaborated that Jenkins, despite being the deceased’s biological son, was unable to show that he was its duly appointed legal representative.
Theseira was alleged to have instructed Kew to rebury the remains but later he also told Kew to lodge a police report after the remains were believed to have been tampered with.
Roz also ruled that those facts were insufficient to establish a cause of action in negligence against Berjaya Land and Theseira while Kew was not deemed to be an employee of the construction giant.
She said the Jenkins should be grateful to Theseira for convincing Kew to report the discovery of the remains to the police.
She ordered Jenkins to pay them RM20,000 in costs to the defendants and set aside March 8 for case management concerning the other respondents.
JC Roz Mawar Rozain decision that Jenkins needs the permission of his mother's estate to sue in negligence sounds rather strange, and her order that he pay costs before appealing a bit too much like doing the work of the defendants' lawyers.
Monday, December 20, 2021
Conviction of Sun reporter S.Arulldas may have involved a perversion of the course of justice -investigation pursuant to S.182 of the Penal Code of Auldass' superiors at Sun Media Group, including its directors required
by Ganesh Sahathevan
In Malaysia, the matter is dealt with under Section 182 of the Penal Code. It states that whoever gives to “any public servant” (a term which includes a police officer) any information, orally or in writing, which he knows or believes to be false, intending thereby to cause such public servant to use his power to “the injury or annoyance” of any person, shall be punished (upon conviction) by a prison term not exceeding six months or to a fine of up to RM2,000 or both.
It is likely that those who interfered in Aruldass' communications with the court and any other public officer in the course of the contempt proceedings brought against him were in breach of Section 182 of the Penal Code.
The matter of Aruldas demands attention for the additional reason that it is among the Vincent Tan cases that ought to be purged from Malaysian case law. Tan controlled Sun Media at all relevant times, as he does now via his Berjaya Group.
TO BE READ WITH
Saturday, January 23, 2021
Judge Saufee Affandi's conviction of Sun reporter S.Arulldas: Arulldas had initially pleaded not guilty, and an investigation into whether Saufee and Arulldas's superiors at Sun Media played any part in changing his plea is required as a matter of urgency
by Ganesh Sahathevan
In the matter of Judge Saufee Affandi's conviction of Sun reporter S.Arulldas, readers ought to be aware that Arulldas initially pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The issue was reported by the NST on 27 March 1998:
A reporter with the Sun daily pleaded not guilty in the Sessions Court in Butterworth today to a charge of defying a court order stopping the media from publishing the alleged victim's identity in a case involving a Sessions Court Judge.
S. Arulldass, 42, claimed trial to the charge of contravening the Subordinate Courts Act, 1948 (Act 1992) before Judge Tarmizi Abdul Rahman.
Later, he was brought before Judge Saufee, who was specifically dispatched from Kuala Lumpur to Penang to hear the matter, and he changed his plea to guilty. However, as explained below, there was no basis for Saufee to accept the plea and enter a conviction.
That he changed his plea while his superiors were not even charged must surely be cause for concern, and is a matter that requires immediate investigation. He does appear to be a victim of a judge playing prosecutor ,and it does seem as if he is entitled to compensation.
TO BE READ WITH
Conviction by Judge Sauufee Affandi of SUN reporter S. Arulldas may well be a case of judge playing prosecutor, in addition to other wrong doing -Arulldas conviction may require erasure, with compensation paid
by Ganesh Sahathevan
As reported previously on this blog, the Judge Affandi managed to find a reporter guilty of contempt by publication of a story in The Sun, despite the reporter not having any authority to publish, and despite the fact that he did not think it necessary to make any finding against the publisher, Sun Media Sdn Bhd, the managing editor Rejal Arbee, and the Editor-In-Chief, Andy Ng (see story below).
-Arulldas conviction needs erasure, with compensation paid
Much is rotten in the 1998 Sessions Crt conviction by Judge Sauufee Affandi of SUN reporter S. Arulldas: Malaysia's judiciary cannot possibly stand by decision to convict reporter for contempt when the offending story was published by SUN Media and its editors , who were not even charged
by Ganesh Sahathevan
As reported yesterday, in 1998 then Sessions Court judge Saufee Affandi was specifically assigned to a contempt matter involving Vincent Tan's Sun Media, but managed to place blame solely on the Sun reporter S.Arulldas while excusing Sun Media, the publisher, and its editors, Rejal Arbee and Andy Ng.How that esteemed jurist managed a finding of guilt given the facts is a matter that requires investigation for the reporter concerned, S.Arulldas could not possibly have published the article on his own. In fact, he could never have published, ever.
As anyone with even a cursory knowledge of how newspapers are published would comprehend, reporters can at best write their stories, but it is the editors who decide if the stories are actually published, their form, and content. A lesser known fact is that even after the editors make their decision, the sub-editors often make their own changes , ostensibly under the supervision of the editors. At The SUN, it was the sub-editors, not the reporters, who decided the headline.
One need not be an esteemed jurist to understand that one can only be held accountable for what one does. Additionally an esteemed jurist such as Saufee would have understood that the doing must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and that there must be a clear unbroken chain of facts proven beyond a reasonable doubt between the intention to do wrong and the criminal act.
How then Suafee might have convicted Arulldass must concern anyone in charge of the Malaysian justice system. As it stands this judgement sits on the books, and cannot be said to foster confidence in Malaysian common law.
That Arulldass first claimed trial and then pleaded guilty before Saufee only adds to the stench surrounding this decision. To quote Mr Justice NH Tan in the Ayer Molek decision:
Something is rotten in the State Of Denmark.
It is for the Chief Justice Of Malaysia to have the matter investigated, and all concerned charged as required.
TO BE READ WITH
In 1998 Sessions Crt judge Saufee Affandi was specifically assigned to a contempt matter involving Vincent Tan's Sun Media, and managed to place blame on the Sun reporter while excusing Sun Media and its editor Rejal Arbee; Saufee's conduct in '98 adds context to his legal innovation in favour of Sun Media, Singapore billionaire Peter Lim, Vincent Tan ,their business partners , and others in the matter of Ganesh Sahathevan v Sun Media
by Ganesh Sahathevan
YBhg Datuk Ahmad Rejal ArbeeAs reported earlier on this blog, former Industrial Court Chairman Saufee Affandi managed to turn an Industrial Court claim by this writer against Vincent Tan's Sun Media into a defamation matter where he undertook to prosecute the case for Singapore billionaire Peter Lim and his business partners, despite not having any authority to do so, and despite Lim himself never commencing a claim against Sun Media or this writer.
It has also been reported here how Saufee mismanaged and in essence attempted to discredit evidence against Bursa companies Gamuda Bhd, Litrak Bhd and the EPF which had financed their privatised LITRAK toll road project, which had been discovered by this writer.
A Sun reporter was fined RM 2,500 today when he admitted defying a court order which prohibited the publication of certain information in the case of a sessions judge who allegedly performed oral sex on a man. Sessions judge Saufee Affendi, who had come from Kuala Lumpur to specially hear the case.
A conviction under this sub-section carries a maximum fine of RM 5,000 or jail up to three years or both. Arulldas, who paid the fine, was accompanied by Sun Media Group editor-in-chief Ahmad Rejal Arbee and editor Andy Ng.
Why Vincent Tan's Sun Media and its editors Ahmad Rejal Arbee and Andy Ng who actually published the story were not also charged is mystifying.
Even more mystifying is the fact that Saufee accepted that the crime of contempt had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt against a reporter who had absolutely no power to publish. The contempt, described above involved the publication of facts which were subject to a court order against publication.
TO BE READ WITH
Butterworth, Tues: A Sun reporter was fined RM 2,500 today when he admitted defying a court order which prohibited the publication of certain information in the case of a sessions judge who allegedly performed oral sex on a man . Sessions judge Saufee Affendi, who had come from Kuala Lumpur to specially hear the case, delivered his ruling after a 90-minute mitigation plea by defence counsel R. Rajasingam.
He said the court had taken into account the facts of the case, the counsel's mitigation and the prosecution argument. Saufee said accused S. Arulldas' admission of guilt was the main mitigating factor which carries weight when passing sentence . He stressed the need for the media to maintain close rapport with the court. He warned Arulldas against repeating such a mistake and fined him.
Arulldas had earlier claimed trial and the hearing was fixed for three days from today. He admitted commiting the offence through an article published in the paper on March 25, after the facts of the case were read out to him. Arulldas, 42, was charged with contravening Section 101(2) of the Subordinate Courts Act, 1948 (Act 92), which had been invoked by the prosecution in the case involving Butterworth sessions court judge Rungit Singh.
Rungit had been charged with gross indecency and using criminal force to outrage the modesty of a man whose identity has been withheld by the court. The sub-section reads that "a court may, at any time, order that no person shall publish the name, address or photograph of any witness ... or any evidence or any other thing likely to lead to the identification of the witness."
A conviction under this sub-section carries a maximum fine of RM 5,000 or jail up to three years or both. Arulldas, who paid the fine, was accompanied by Sun Media Group editor-in-chief Ahmad Rejal Arbee and editor Andy Ng.
(c) 1998 Sun Media Group Sdn Bhd.
Document thesum0020010928du6h003qw
BUTTERWORTH, June 16 (Bernama) - A journalist with the 'Sun' newspaper was today fined RM2,500 for defying a court order when reporting on a case involving a judge.
S.Arulldas, 42, who had pleaded not guilty when charged in the Sessions Court here on April 30, changed his plea today and apologised to the court.
He was charged with defying an order issued by the court on March 24 prohibiting the reporting of any evidence or details that might reveal the identity of the alleged victim in the case against judge Rungit Singh.
Rungit is facing three charges of using criminal force to outrage the modesty of a man, and two alternative charges of committing acts of gross indecency by performing oral sex on the man.
In sentencing Arulldas, judge Sauffee Affendi said counsel R. Rajasingam's hour-long mitigation was the longest he had heard in his legal career and the points put forward had been noted.
According to Rajasingam, the court order was stale as the authorities had not issued a similar gag-order before Rungit was charged and earlier reports in 'The Star' and 'New Straits Times' newspapers had already identified the alleged victim.
He also questioned why the prosecution did not apply to the court to amend the alleged victim's name in the charge sheet to "Mr X" or "Mr Y" in view of the fact that the sheet would become a public document after that and anyone could obtain it.
Rajasingam said the court should only issue such orders to avoid interference in the administration of justice and not to avoid anyone from embarrassment.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin submitted to the court that the March 24 order was not applicable to media reports before the Rungit case came to court.
Arulldas was charged under Section 101 (2) of the Subordinate Courts Act 1948 which provides for a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years in jail, or both, upon conviction.
Arulldas, who was accompanied by Sun Media Group editor-in-chief Ahmad Rejal Arbee, paid his fine.
Copyright(C) 1998 BERNAMA The Malaysian National News Agency
PENANG, Thurs. - A reporter with the Sun daily pleaded not guilty in the Sessions Court in Butterworth today to a charge of defying a court order stopping the media from publishing the alleged victim's identity in a case involving a Sessions Court Judge.
S. Arulldass, 42, claimed trial to the charge of contravening the Subordinate Courts Act, 1948 (Act 1992) before Judge Tarmizi Abdul Rahman.
On Tuesday, Sungai Petani Sessions Court Judge Ghazali Cha had made the order when another Sessions Court Judge Rungit Singh a/l Jaswant Singh was charged with using criminal force to outrage the modesty of a person.
In the case, Ghazali had invoked section 101 (2) of the Act, to stop the media, both print and electronic, from publishing the alleged victim's name, address, photograph or any information leading to the identification of the alleged victim.
Arulldass was represented by Jagdeep Singh Deo while DPP Yaacob Md Sam prosecuted.
Jagdeep is also one of six lawyers defending Rungit, who is facing three counts of using criminal force to outrage the modesty of the person and two alternative charges of committing an act of gross indecency with a person by performing oral sex.
The five other lawyers are Karpal Singh, Gurbachan Singh, Christopher Fernando, Ranjit Singh Dhillon and Teja Singh Panesar.
Arulldass, who was accompanied by his wife, Theresa, Sun editor Andy Ng, its regional (northern) editor Ng Kee Seng and several colleagues, was alleged to have used words which could identify the victim in the case.
Arulldass, if found guilty, could face a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years' imprisonment or both.
Tarmizi fixed the case to be mentioned on April 30 and allowed bail at RM5,000.
Caption: Arulldass ... charged.
SEE ALSO
Industrial Crt chairman Saufee Affandi decided that Singapore billionaire Peter Lim had been defamed-Industrial Court has no jurisdiction to hear defamation matters, and Saufee did not rely on any decision of any competent court that Lim had been defamed
Misnaming of decision in favour of Tan Sri Dato Seri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun by judge Saufee Affandi who was closely linked to Eusoffe Chin and Tan's disbarred lawyer VK Lingam adds to the urgent need for a long overdue review and expungement of Tan related decisions
by Ganesh Sahathevan As recently reported on this blog: Conduct and circumstances surrounding former Sessions and Industrial Crt judge Sauf...
- by Ganesh Sahathevan Berjaya Group founder Tan Sri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun and Berjaya Land Berhad have demanded a public apology and RM2...
by Ganesh Sahathevan As previously reported: After approximately SIX years of correspondence and after prolonged periods of silence and...
No comments:
Post a Comment