Perak Crisis: Nizar Vs Zamry

I was amused when i read through the news and comments on the court cases between Nizar Vs Zambry on the issue of Sacking and Appointment of Perak stake Menteri Besar.

Frankly speaking, over the last few years, i had heard and see news report on ineffectiveness in our judges in providing the Ground of Decision for the cases heard. Thus, when it was reported that the High Court judge, Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim, had produced a detailed Ground of Decision to provide sound reasoning on why and how he come to the conclusion that Nizar is still the lawful Menteri Besar, seems to imply that there might still hope in our legal system after all.

However, this hope seems to be smashed hard when a single judge of Court of Appeal granted Zambry a stayed order without providing a clear definition and ground. At the point, some opposition leader had commented on the sudden efficiency demonstrate by the Court of Appeal in processing the request for a stay, and ability to come to a conclusion within hours. However, some had say that it is a norm that such urgent case will be heard first.

Since i have no idea on such thing, i think it might make sense. However, this doesn't seems to be the the case when Nizar make a filling to set aside the stayed order. The hearing was scheduled to heard 5 days later! Isn't that an urgent filing like this will be expediated, which is the norm as argued? Why the different treatment then? To add to the insult, the application to set aside the stayed order had subsequently reschedule to be heard together with the Appeal case filed by Zambry, and its to be heard after the Zambry's appeal case hearing!

What to set aside after the main appealed heard? Isn't it down right discrimination ? Aren't court suppose to uphold justice? Yet, one is served with super efficiency, while the other is a total inefficiency, with allegation that document not reached to the person in charged.

By the way, Court of Appeal doesn't failed us in providing more surprise by coming to a conclusion in less than 2 days time that High Court Judge had err in his decision, where in the 3 judge quodrum's view, Zambry should be the legally appointed Menteri Besar. According to the news and blog comment, the so called judgement given was very briefed and seems to simply following the appellant's lawyer's argument without really taking care of the argument presented by the defendant, i.e. Nizar's lawyer, in this instance.

With Court of Appeal being so efficient in delivery its verdict, let's us witness whether it is equally efficient in producing its Ground of Decision. Let's us examine their reasoning and thinking process and have the public make a judgement on whether they are indeed impartial in hearing the case.

Let's see whether the 3 judges of Court of Appeal able to provide sound reasoning on why Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim had err in his judgement, as detailed in his Ground of Decision.

Suggestion to Penang Chief Minister (Nov 23, 2008)

Dear Sir,

In my view, education is a very important tool to eradicate poverty. Thus, i would like to suggest that the Penang government set up a non-partisan task force to look into possible way to help the child of all the poor families (iregardless of race and religion), who are still study in primary school in improving their academic result.

One way could be organise tution class or motivation class involving volunteers for such families. Apart from pure tution on academic subject, it might be good if some activities could be added which will inspire the young on some very good value such as hardworking and etc.

Obviously, say is easily than done. However, by starting such initiative, i believe that we could start to see some good result in coming few years time.

Thanks.

Regards,
Poh Soon