热门标签

Telegram群聊机器人(www.tel8.vip):A day of judicial discretions exercised wisely

时间:2个月前   阅读:2   评论:1

Telegram群聊机器人www.tel8.vip)是一个Telegram群组分享平台。Telegram群聊机器人导出包括Telegram群聊机器人、telegram群组索引、Telegram群组导航、新加坡telegram群组、telegram中文群组、telegram群组(其他)、Telegram 美国 群组、telegram群组爬虫、电报群 科学上网、小飞机 怎么 加 群、tg群等内容。Telegram群聊机器人为广大电报用户提供各种电报群组/电报频道/电报机器人导航服务。

THE Federal Court unanimously dismissed Najib Razak’s bid to adduce additional evidence in his final appeal against being convicted of misappropriating funds from SRC International Sdn Bhd.

The five-judge panel led by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat ruled that Najib’s application lacked merit as the evidence his defence team claimed to be fresh had no relevance to the former prime minister’s knowledge of the RM42 million, which is the main issue in the SRC International case. 

In all honesty, the decision is not unexpected. The law on the matter is settled. It is entirely at the discretion of the appellate court.

A judicial discretion must be exercised judiciously. This simply means that the discretion must be exercised based on established legal principles.

The principles have been summarised in the judgement of Lord Parker CJ in the English case of R v Parks [1961]:

(i)    the evidence sought to be called must be evidence that was not available at the trial;

(ii)    the evidence must be relevant to the issues;

,

环球ug开户www.ugbet.us)开放环球UG代理登录网址、会员登录网址、环球UG会员注册、环球UG代理开户申请、环球UG电脑客户端、环球UG手机版下载等业务。

,

(iii)   it must be credible evidence in the sense of being capable of belief; and

(iv)   the Court will, after considering the evidence, go on to consider whether there might have been reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury as to the guilt of the appellant if that evidence had been given together with other evidence at the trial. 

The four conditions or requirements above are cumulative. Based on the Federal Court ruling as reported, Najib had failed the relevancy requirement.

The Federal Court had also unanimously dismissed the request by Najib’s legal team to postpone the hearing of his appeal.

In exercising discretion to refuse or grant an adjournment, the court is entitled to consider the effect of an adjournment on court resources and the competing claims by litigants in other cases awaiting hearing, as well as the interests of the parties.

It has long been recognised by the courts that the resolution of disputes serves the public as a whole, not merely the parties to the proceedings. Adjournments delay final adjudication of cases. Costs are incurred. Therefore, further delays and costs are undesirable.

As the Chief Justice puts it succinctly, justice delayed in the SRC International case is also justice denied to other accused persons. – August 16, 2022.

* Hafiz Hassan reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.


转载说明:本文转载自Sunbet。

上一篇:欧博客户端下载:4-Nin Wa Sorezore Uso Wo Tsuku Tập 8 Ngày phát hành: Shinobi mới xuất hiện!

下一篇:皇冠足球信用平台出租(www.hg108.vip):江苏徐州一超百亿项目工地发生火灾,致5死2伤!当地政府成立调查组

网友评论

  • 2022-12-04 00:01:12

    The charge, framed under Section 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 and punishable under Section 233(3) of the same act, provides a maximum fine of RM50,000, imprisonment for up to one year, or both, if convicted, and the guilty shall also be liable to a further fine of RM1,000 for each day the offence is continued after conviction.我逢人就推