Monday, April 30, 2018

Just one fcking ringgit

MM Online - For Tian Chua, lawyers say time is of the essence (extracts):

KUALA LUMPUR, April 30 — PKR’s Chua Tian Chang could stand a better chance of challenging his disqualification by the Election Commission if he initiates this before rather than after the general election, according to legal experts.

While they did not mean his chances would diminish with time, they explained that launching the challenge now would afford the politician popularly known as Tian Chua more options.

On Saturday, the EC ruled that Chua was disqualified by a RM2,000 fine he received in March, notwithstanding the High Court’s explanation that the amount was chosen explicitly to avoid affecting his eligibility to run for and hold office.

“If Tian Chua institutes a legal challenge in respect of the EC’s decision to disqualify him before GE14, he could seek for an injunction to stop the elections of the Batu parliamentary seat,” said Malaysian Bar president George Varughese.

Malaysian Bar constitutional law committee co-chairman Surendra Ananth also suggested that seeking an injunction now would be the wiser option than to apply for an election petition, which he pointed can only take effect after May 9.

Besides an injunction, Surendra said Chua could also apply for a mandamus order to compel the EC to register him as a candidate.

A mandamus is a writ that makes it mandatory for the responding agency to execute its duty in relation to the order. [...]

I tend to support the legal advice because succeeding in an appeal after the election and frustrating the already conducted election in Kepong will become very messy. Yes, obtain the mandamus as a means to participate in GE14 rather than a subsequent by-election.

Tian Chua's case stands strongly in his favour on two counts, namely:

(a) the High Court’s in fining him RM2000 had explicitly explained the amount was precisely chosen to avoid affecting his eligibility to run for and hold office, and

(b) a case of stare decisis, in which Tian Chua was previously fined RM2000 but which permitted him to continue his status as a MP for Kepong.

At that time Karpal Singh (then alive) had stated that RM2000 disqualified Tian Chua from being MP for kepong, but the court had then ruled otherwise, much to the bemusement of Karpal.

The problem lies in the statement of the Federal Constitution that a candidate is disqualified if he has been fined “not less than RM2,000”.

As reported by MM Online, some interpret this to mean RM2,001 and above, but others including the late Karpal Singh believe that a fine of RM2,000 is exactly enough to trigger the disqualification.

But my argument is the earlier case provided a legal precedent (stare decisis), so it doesn't matter now about the legality of the matter being not fully established. Actually it has been established which is why we have a stare decisis.

Remember the f**king shameful highway robbery of the notorious Adorna precedent, which was law for nine disgraceful years until (thank goodness) Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi overturned it on 21 Jan 2010 in the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San and two others with words describing that earlier notorious precedent as an obvious and blatant error?


  1. doggie, dirty n dedak render tis penyamun n pencuri collaborator to disregard the law.

  2. I thought once a convicted person serves his time or pays his fine five year after that he is eligible to be an elected representative? Like Anwar world be eligible 5 years after his release so TC should be eligible, since his conviction was more than 5 years ago, unless he didn't pay the fine then???

    1. his previous fine was below that which would have rendered him ineligible, thus the 5 year period does NOT apply

  3. If nominating Tian Chua as a candidate for Batu is so important to PKR, Why oh why!, did PKR not put in a standby candidate knowing full well this might happen even before nomination?

    What makes PKR think he is so indispensable and another PKR candidate not capable as well?

    It tells a lot about decision making in PKR.

    1. i thot the dog state tc disqualified after nomination hour over?

  4. Was TC informed that his nomination was officially rejected before or after nomination time closed, ie 1000am? If it was after 1000am then there was no chance to nominate another PKR candidate. If he was informed before 1000am then he could have used a standby. Tsk tsk.

  5. I only wanna know why kaytee never inform tian chua about all this. Kaytee was disappear few days and only appeared during nomination day.

    Where have you been kaytee? Rosmah's house?

    1. went to inform Sing Immigration of your improper slutting with Malaysian politicians, wakakaka

    2. Is that all? I am expecting better from you. You should be braver than that singapore historian who endured 6 hours of question under singapore parliamentary select commitee

      Australia also can....wanna try?

    3. Kaytee use diplomatic passport. Just with spore immigration, no sign of cheebye kaytee. Let alone work in aviation industry.

      Tell me lei. Which one?

  6. I think the RO/EC is right.

    What was the reason(s) given by the High Court judge to reduce the fine/sentence?

    What is the crux of the issue? Criminal? Or for him to remain as an MP?

    To reduce the fine/punishment/sentence must be based on the mitigating factor of the criminal act and not because for him to stay as an MP.

    I say it again, the RO/EC is right. Let the Court of Appeal decides.

    My 2 sen.

    1. a waste of money n time. the view will be partisan, no point to argue. the court make decision once, y cant we all just abide by tis? forever appeal in stupid case like tis. dun side the dog la.

    2. Then my dear friend HY, MP can go on commit criminal act and remain as an MP because the fine/punishment when upon appeal can be reduced to the RM2,000.00 threshold. Wakakaka..

    3. British, American, and Canadian English generally use judgment when referring to a court's formal ruling.

      M'sia laws follow likewise.

      If that judgment goes to appeal, the appellate court will have the opportunity to review both the precedent and the case under appeal, perhaps overruling the previous case law by setting a new precedent of higher.

      The doctrine of precedent is a fundamental constraint on judicial decision-making The general idea behind the doctrine of precedent is that judges, when they are deciding cases, must pay proper respect to past judicial decisions. Sometimes this means that judges are bound to apply the reasoning of judges in past cases — in other words, ‘follow’ past decisions — when deciding cases that raise similar facts.

      Hence TC's case already has a set precedent.

      The ro/ec is acting beyond their right, simple as that!

      U r indeed in the realm if unknown!

    4. kawan, i am fine if tc is disqualified n ro/ec shd make clear abt tis b4 the nomination, their role is to facilitate not act like dog.

  7. Court of Appeal? That will take years. And that is exactly what they want. By the time the Court of Appeal confirms TC’s eligibility (maybe) and triggers a by-election BN would have ruled BATU for a few years.

  8. Copied from one blogsite :

    [Sunday, April 29, 2018
    Singapore Picks Up On SPR's Strange Behaviour.
    Quote from Spore’s Straits Times in relation to disqualification of Tian Chua and Dr Streram:

    “Both these disqualifications are unprecedented in recent times, say political observers. *It is practically unheard of for the EC to ignore a court judgment, while there are no laws regarding entry pass requirements to become a candidate*.

    My comments : Third World village idiots. The world is laughing at these clowns.]

    1. These r no 3rd world village idiots.

      They r kiasu, shiting-in-the-pants ketuanan freaks, doing their service, paid or otherwise, to give an a last minute helping hands!

    2. aaaargh.......village idiots.....

  9. Even if Tian Chua's disqualification sticks, We will support BN to become the opposition. Not a single vote will go to BN.