PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court yesterday dismissed lawyer Karpal Singh’s review application seeking a fresh hearing by the Appeals Court of the prosecution’s appeal in his sedition case.
A five-member panel chaired by Federal Court judge Datuk Hashim Yusoff said there was no basis to say that there was coram failure.
Karpal Singh had wanted the court to review a decision of the Appeals Court which had also rejected his review application to set aside the decision of another Appeals Court panel which ordered him to enter his defence on a sedition charge.
In his review application, Karpal Singh cited coram failure because one of the three judges, Justice Datuk Clement Allan Skinner, was allegedly not proficient in Bahasa Malaysia and hence could not be in a position to understand the 105-page judgment written in Bahasa Malaysia by Justice Datuk Ahmad Maarop who had led that Appeals Court panel.
Federal Court judges Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong, Datin Paduka Zaleha Zahari, Datuk Zainun Ali and Datuk Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha were the other judges presiding on the panel.
On June 11, 2010, Karpal Singh was discharged and acquitted by the High Court at the end of the prosecution’s case on a charge of uttering seditious words against the Sultan of Perak at his legal firm in Jalan Pudu Lama, Kuala Lumpur, between noon and 12.30 pm on Feb 6, 2009.
Karpal Singh, 71, was alleged to have said that the sultan’s removal of Datuk Seri Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin as the Perak menteri besar and Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir’s appointment to the position could be questioned in a court of law.
On Jan 20 this year, the Appeals Court panel comprising Justices Datuk Ahmad Maarop, Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali and Skinner allowed the prosecution’s appeal to set aside Karpal Singh’s acquittal and ordered him (Karpal Singh) to enter his defence.
Karpal Singh subsequently filed a review at the Appeals Court against the Jan 20 decision but he was unsuccessful as the Appeals Court’s three-member panel chaired by Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Raus Md Shariff dismissed his review application on April 5 this year.
In the proceedings today, Karpal Singh submitted that Raus, in presiding his (Karpal Singh’s) review application at the Appeals Court, had said Justice Skinner may not be fluent in Bahasa Malaysia but it did not mean he could not understand Bahasa Malaysia.
He said a judge must be fluent in a language and it was not enough for a judge to just be able to understand a language.
Karpal Singh said judges from East Malaysia usually do not understand Bahasa Malaysia properly, especially the older ones, and added that Skinner, who was born in Myanmar, was a Sabahan.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Noorin Badarudin argued that there cannot be a miscarriage of justice when allegations were made purely on conjecture and unsubstantiated belief of a party to a proceeding.
She said there must be cogent evidence to say that Skinner was incapacitated, which was tantamount to coram failure.
“He (Karpal Singh) believes Justice Skinner is not fluent in Bahasa Malaysia. He believes Justice Skinner could not understand the 105-page judgement,” she said.
She said she was conducting the appeal where Justice Skinner was one of the judges, and added that the judge (Justice Skinner) was very interactive in the appeal proceeding.
Noorin said Karpal Singh failed to satisfy the court that the order of the Appeals Court (in ordering him to enter his defence) was a nullity, and added that that panel was properly constituted. — Bernama