Court explains stiff penalty for shoe thrower

The act of throwing shoes at a person is obnoxious, demeaning and degrading, and more so if this is done in a court of law.

Justifying the one-year jail sentence imposed on imam Hoslan Hussein for throwing his shoes at three Federal Court judges on Feb 22, Chief Judge of Malaya Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin said a stiff custodial sentence for such an offence would redeem the dignity of the court.

"There have been many other cases of contempt of court, some committed by prominent lawyers, directors of companies and politicians, but such severe sentence was not imposed.

"It must be stated that the act of throwing objects, like shoes, have always been viewed upon as being obnoxious, demeaning, and degrading when hurled against a human being, and worst still, throwing at a panel of judges of the apex court of the nation," Justice Zulkefli said.

He noted, in the 16-page written judgment of a three-member panel of the Federal Court that on March 8 jailed Hoslan for a year for his act, that even an apology would not lessen the gravity of the offence.

The Federal Court today allowed a postponement of Hoslan's application for a review of the sentence to Monday.

'Court holds no grudge against Hoslan'

Justice Zulkefli, who sat with Federal Court judges Suriyadi Halim Omar and Zaharah Zakaria added in the decision to jail the imam for a year that the court does not hold a grudge against Hoslan.

Neither did it mete out the punishment on personal interests but as a move to protect, preserve the power, respect and dignity of the apex court, the judgment states.

Justice Zulkefli said Hoslan had clearly scandalised the court by his conduct and disorderly behaviour.

"A scurrilous attack on the presiding judges to show his frustration and disgust at the decision, which was unfavourable to him, is clearly an affront to the impartiality of the judges of the apex court and to the judiciary as an institution.

"Such a serious and deliberate attack has clearly undermined the dignity and authority of this court, which cannot and must not be condoned," the Chief Judge of Malaya added.

He reasoned that Hoslan had committed contempt in the face of the court on Feb 22, but it was not appropriate to immediately proceed with the contempt proceeding against the imam.

The court had to adjourn and stand down to hear other applications as well, and to have the court back in order by removing Hoslan out.

"There may be circumstances wherein it may not be suitable and appropriate for the contempt proceedings to be proceeded against Hoslan immediately after the act was committed," Justice Zulkefli said.

The court's power to punish contemptuous acts such as a person's conduct, slander, contemptuous utterance and any act of disobedience to a court order is enshrined in the federal constitution and Section 13 of the Courts of Judicature Act.

"Section 13 states the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court shall have the power to punish any contempt."

Hoslan, who was present in court throughout today's proceedings, was handcuffed to a Prisons Department officer.