If only our courts are speedy
R G CandiahPublished: May 13, 2009 9:36 AM | Updated: May 13, 2009 9:40 AM
I refer to your article entitled, "Court of Appeal hears Zambry's Appeal," where it stated that a three-member panel, headed by Justice Ramly Mohd Ali, has been hastily set up to hear Zambry's stay application.
The panel began hearing the application at 11:45am at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, a few hours after the appeal was filed.
I only wish that the courts act in such for all cases -- super fast and super efficient. I am intrigued why in some cases, it takes months or even years, when, in the above situation, it only took several hours for a panel to be set up.
Why the double standards?
The man who steals a loaf of bread has to rot in jail for months before his case is even heard. The rationale behind this and the usual excuse is that there is backlog of cases.
There are countless of cases in the past where the maxim, "Justice Delayed is Justice Denied," holds true and each and every one of us has either had a friend experience it or have experienced it ourselves.
For example, according to the Women's Centre for Change, Penang (WCC) a rape case was reported in New Straits Times on July 29, 2008 titled, "Rape accused gets third delay of appeal." The report states that a 78-year-old man was found guilty of raping a teenager and sentenced to a 12 year jail term in 1998. The offence was committed in 1992. The teenager was made pregnant by the rape and subsequently bore a child. The accused however appealed against his conviction and is still currently out on bail.
As reported, this particular case took six years from the time the offence was committed to the accused being convicted. The accused's appeal to the High Court took another two years
and his subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal has still not been heard after eight years. The whole process has already taken 15 years and is still on-going.
How long does a rape victim have to wait for justice? And how come the Court of Appeal has got time to hear Zambry's case with superfast speed?
Are the courts and judges selective in hearing cases?
If there is such a tremendous amount of backlog of cases in the lower courts, the Court of Appeal should lend some of its judges to the lower courts to help clear the backlog of cases, since, judging by the speed the Appellate Court judges took to set up the panel to hear Zambry's case, they have much time in their hands and can help the lower courts to clear the backlog of cases.
The panel began hearing the application at 11:45am at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, a few hours after the appeal was filed.
I only wish that the courts act in such for all cases -- super fast and super efficient. I am intrigued why in some cases, it takes months or even years, when, in the above situation, it only took several hours for a panel to be set up.
Why the double standards?
The man who steals a loaf of bread has to rot in jail for months before his case is even heard. The rationale behind this and the usual excuse is that there is backlog of cases.
There are countless of cases in the past where the maxim, "Justice Delayed is Justice Denied," holds true and each and every one of us has either had a friend experience it or have experienced it ourselves.
For example, according to the Women's Centre for Change, Penang (WCC) a rape case was reported in New Straits Times on July 29, 2008 titled, "Rape accused gets third delay of appeal." The report states that a 78-year-old man was found guilty of raping a teenager and sentenced to a 12 year jail term in 1998. The offence was committed in 1992. The teenager was made pregnant by the rape and subsequently bore a child. The accused however appealed against his conviction and is still currently out on bail.
As reported, this particular case took six years from the time the offence was committed to the accused being convicted. The accused's appeal to the High Court took another two years
and his subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal has still not been heard after eight years. The whole process has already taken 15 years and is still on-going.
How long does a rape victim have to wait for justice? And how come the Court of Appeal has got time to hear Zambry's case with superfast speed?
Are the courts and judges selective in hearing cases?
If there is such a tremendous amount of backlog of cases in the lower courts, the Court of Appeal should lend some of its judges to the lower courts to help clear the backlog of cases, since, judging by the speed the Appellate Court judges took to set up the panel to hear Zambry's case, they have much time in their hands and can help the lower courts to clear the backlog of cases.
View Comments0