It’s not every day evidence law makes headlines in Southeast Asia. The Malaysian government began prosecuting opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy soon after his PKR alliance did surprisingly well in the 2008 general elections. Now, the High Court has excluded DNA evidence linking Anwar to the alleged sodomy. The judges found that the DNA samples had been taken from a toothbrush, water bottle, and hand towel in Anwar’s prison cell were taken without Anwar’s permission. Now, the prosecution must rely on the testimony of the alleged sodomy victim, who, as I’ve written earlier, has already been caught in a “compromising position” when it came to light that he had an affair with one of the female prosecutors. I’m not sure if this means Anwar will escape conviction, but it might suggest UMNO feels secure enough to let him go. After all, Prime Minister Najib is considering calling early elections.
Rules of Evidence saves Anwar
Comments Off on Rules of Evidence saves Anwar
Filed under Anwar Ibrahim, evidence
Manila Marquez: An effective influence
The Philippine Supreme Court faces more blowback over the impeachment attempt against the Arroyo-appointed Ombudsman. Several justices are facing impeachment threats from Congress, although thus far it involves more bluster than bludgeoning. However, what really struck me in Supreme Court spokesman Marquez’ recent comments, as reported by PhilStar, was how he characterized the impeachment process as a threat to judicial independence. Here are a few quotes:
“There appears to be concerted efforts to bring the court down,” SC spokesman Midas Marquez told reporters.
…
“Filing of impeachment against our justices will have to be studied very carefully. It is an effective attempt to influence future decisions of the court,” he lamented.
While impeachment has rarely been used in the U.S., several Filipino justices have faced impeachment attempts, including former Chief Justice Davide over his swearing in Arroyo. Indeed, that impeachment attempt took a toll on the court, but part of me is surprised Marquez admitted as much. Perhaps his comments were a preemptive strike attempting to portray the impeachment proceedings threats against sitting justices as threats to the rule of law rather than attempts to punish bad behavior (such as the recent plagiarism allegations, lobbying on behalf of plaintiffs, etc.).
Comments Off on Manila Marquez: An effective influence
Filed under Philippines, Supreme Court
No order in the court
Every good law drama has at least one scene in which the judge resorts to banging his gavel and yelling, “Order in the court!” Of course, such scenes only make sense if the underlying assumption is that judges control their courtrooms. However, a recent Supreme Court decision from Burma suggests Burmese judges have no such luck. The justices decided that judges cannot decide who can – and, more importantly, cannot – attend a court hearing held inside a prison. Burma is notorious for conducting trials of political prisoners in prisons such as Insein and forbidding family from attending. This recent decision has received a good deal of press coverage (DVB has an article here). What’s unclear to me is whether this holding has any value as precedence for trials held outside prisons. The 2000 Judiciary Act grants judges wide discretion on whether to hold trials in camera. If the Supreme Court’s decision affects regular courts as well, it seems it would directly contradict the act. Alas, it wouldn’t be the first time Burma’s government fails to follow both the letter and spirit of the law.
Comments Off on No order in the court
Filed under Burma, judicial independence, Myanmar
Consequences
Sometimes, as academics, we study the decisions of constitutional courts for their political and legal value. However, sometimes the most important impact of these decisions is on the lives of ordinary citizens. Sadly, a recent outrage in Indonesia reminds us that the decisions courts make can have grave consequences.
A while back, I mentioned a case in which Indonesia’s Mahkamah Konstitusi upheld the 1965 Blasphemy Law as applied to the Ahmadiyah sect. Now, as has been widely reported, less than a year later, a mob of Muslims attacks and stabbed three Ahmadis to death in a village not far from Jakarta. This has justly been portrayed as a black eye for Indonesia. The Economist accuses the government of “fudging” on protecting human rights. Yet, few commentators seem to have drawn the line back to the Mahkamah Konstitusi. Of course, the justices bear absolutely no blame for the violence – that lies solely at the feet of a small number of disturbed young men. Still, I can’t help but wonder if a clear moral mandate from the court might have sent a signal that suppression of minorities would not be tolerated.
In a recent speech, president SBY encouraged Indonesians to utilize legal means to resolve their disputes. I certainly hope more of his countrymen heed his advice.
Filed under indonesia, Islam, Mahkamah Konstitusi
Burma appoints Judges
Burma’s new national parliament (Hluttaw) has been quite busy with appointments these past two weeks. Last Friday, it appointed all nine members of the Constitutional Tribunal. According to the New Light of Myanmar, the appointees are:
The three members nominated by the elected President were U Thein Soe, Dr Tin Aung Aye and Daw Khin Hla Myint. The three members chosen by the Speaker of the Pyithu Hluttaw were U Tun Kyi, U Soe Thein and U Khin Tun. The three members nominated by the Speaker of the Amyotha Hluttaw were U Hsan Myint, U Myint Kyaing and Daw Mi Mi Yi.
The chief judge, Thein Soe, is also the former chairman of the Elections Commission. I don’t know much about any of the other members. I believe Tun Kyi is a lawyer with the Ministry of Justice and deeply involved in writing the constitution. I do wonder how Thein Soe will manage the court. While the Elections Commission received a fair share of criticism, it also seemed more willing to entertain opposition challenges than the Supreme Court ever did. I’m not sure if that was a sign of the man or the regime’s approach towards the elections though.
Yesterday, according to DVB, the parliament also appointed judge Tun Tun Oo as the new chief justice. He will replace long-serving Chief Justice Aung Toe, who first joined the high court bench in 1989. Again, I’m not that familiar with him, but the fact that he was personally nominated by President Thein Sein probably speaks to how independent the court will be once it convenes.
Dominic J. Nardi, Jr. 
You must be logged in to post a comment.