by Ganesh Sahathevan
The article below is being reposted given the recent calls for a Royal Commission Of Inquiry into judicial corruption.
See first
Eusoff Chin,2nd from left ,standing next
to disgraced Malaysian lawyer VK Lingam
RCI into judicial corruption needs to review work of Sauffee Afandi bin Mohamad ,formerly of the Sessions Crt,Industrial Crt,and all involved in matters involving Sun Media Group
by Ganesh Sahathevan
Dato' Sauffee Afandi bin Mohamad was a judge of the Sessions Court and the Industrial Court. In 2006 as chairman of the Industrial Court he handed down the decision in Sahathevan v Sun Media in a decision which is probably best described as imaginative,bold and courageous.
In 1998 the then "Sessions judge Saufee Affendi"...(went to Penang) from Kuala Lumpur to "specially hear" a matter against S. Arulldas a reporter from The Sun newspaper, who was charged with defying a court order which prohibited the publication of a matter before the courts.
Saufee's decision in '98 is reported in the stories below.Readers are reminded that mere reporters have no control over publication, which is entirely the decision of the editors. Despite that fact it was only the reporter who was charged, and finally found guilty as charged, after admitting sole guilt, by a judge brought up from Kuala Lumpur to "specially hear" the matter. It does appear as if the decision against the reporter was pre-determined so as to ensure that his superiors,and the publisher of The Sun, Sun Media Group Bhd, did not suffer any penalty.
Many of those involved remain active in the media and in public life in Malaysia, and hence their conduct with regards the above are well within the ambit of the upcoming Royal Commission Of Inquiry into judicial corruption.Readers are reminded that the RCI is meant to restore confidence in the judiciary.
This writer had in 2009 queried Saufee about his dealings with the owners of Sun Media, but he refused to provide a response.
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
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
Dato' Sauffee Afandi bin Mohamad was a judge of the Sessions Court and the Industrial Court. In 2006 as chairman of the Industrial Court he handed down the decision in Sahathevan v Sun Media in a decision which is probably best described as imaginative,bold and courageous.
In 1998 the then "Sessions judge Saufee Affendi"...(went to Penang) from Kuala Lumpur to "specially hear" a matter against S. Arulldas a reporter from The Sun newspaper, who was charged with defying a court order which prohibited the publication of a matter before the courts.
Saufee's decision in '98 is reported in the stories below.Readers are reminded that mere reporters have no control over publication, which is entirely the decision of the editors. Despite that fact it was only the reporter who was charged, and finally found guilty as charged, after admitting sole guilt, by a judge brought up from Kuala Lumpur to "specially hear" the matter. It does appear as if the decision against the reporter was pre-determined so as to ensure that his superiors,and the publisher of The Sun, Sun Media Group Bhd, did not suffer any penalty.
Many of those involved remain active in the media and in public life in Malaysia, and hence their conduct with regards the above are well within the ambit of the upcoming Royal Commission Of Inquiry into judicial corruption.Readers are reminded that the RCI is meant to restore confidence in the judiciary.
This writer had in 2009 queried Saufee about his dealings with the owners of Sun Media, but he refused to provide a response.
END
Court fines Sun reporter RM2,500.
By Cynthia Blemin
335 words
17 June 1998
English
(c) The Christchurch Press, INL 1998
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
SUN REPORTER FINED RM2,500 FOR DEFYING COURT ORDER.
372 words
16 June 1998
English
(c) 1998 Chamber World Network
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
National
Reporter pleads not guilty to defying court order
299 words
27 March 1998
Main/Lifestyle; 2*
12
English
Copyright (c) 1998 Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved.
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.
Remarks made by NSW Supreme Court Justice Desmond Fagan in relation to the interpretation of “hostile passages” in the Quran have caused outrage amongst the local Muslim community, as well as sparked calls from the NSW legal profession for greater understanding of Islam.
A former security guard at the US embassy in Kuala Lumpur is seeking reinstatement or compensation, alleging he was unlawfully dismissed from his job. (AFP pic)
