[ad_1]
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here set January 21 to issue its ruling on whether to allow a higher judge to challenge the judges’ court’s decision to conduct a closed-door investigation against you.
Lawyer Bastian Vendargon, who appeared for Appeal Court Judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, said that Judge Mariana Yahya set the date for the decision after hearing arguments from them and the Attorney General (AGC), which represents the Judges Ethics Committee, in the chambers. .
Co-attorney Joy Wilson Appukuttan said the court extended a temporary stay of the court hearing until the decision is issued.
Senior federal attorney Ahmad Hanir Hambaly @ Arwi, representing the court, maintained that Hamid’s attempt to initiate judicial review is “premature” as he has not yet appeared in court.
The court was originally scheduled to hear the accusations against Hamid on October 22, but this was postponed until November 25. However, Mariana granted a provisional suspension on November 12.
The committee had brought Hamid to appear before them after two fellow judges filed complaints against him.
“The applicant (Hamid) has not been found in breach of the Code of Ethics. The court may even dismiss complaints against him if they find that the violation is not proven, ”Hanir said.
He said it was an abuse of the judicial process by Hamid to question the court’s refusal to conduct an open procedure to hear his case.
“The aforementioned decision about the closed hearing was in accordance with the law,” Hanir said.
Vendargon said they argued that the court exceeded its power and violated the principle of natural justice when it decided to convene the investigation against Hamid.
“Some of the court members were judges who participated in the Sodomy 2 and Karpal Singh cases, who have a direct link to the complaint in their affidavit.
“They wrote charges that went far beyond the two original complaints,” he said.
Hamid seeks to overturn the committee’s decision to carry out its investigation through closed-door proceedings, adding that the investigation must be conducted in an open forum.
He also wanted a statement that the charges against him were null and void, as the committee had acted unconstitutionally in preparing the charges.
At an international conference in Kuala Lumpur two years ago, Hamid had alleged that there had been judicial interference in several high-profile cases.
It led to a lawsuit against the Chief Justice early last year by lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo, accusing the superior judge of failing to defend and preserve the integrity of the judiciary.
The committee then issued Hamid a notice of cause for demonstration regarding the affidavit and a drug case ruling.
Hamid, among other things, had said in the ruling that the judiciary was expected to act as a check and balance in the executive and the legislative, as provided in the Federal Constitution.
On September 8, Hamid responded to the notice of cause of the show, which according to sources was quite explosive, where the judge remained faithful to the entire content of the affidavit and also to a 101-page ruling that he delivered in early June. .
