I was at the 13th May Forum organized by the DAP last week. As one speaker commented, it was not really a forum, but more like a political rally. It was not the first and I'm sure it will not be the last that DAP are going to organized these s0-called 'public forums' turned political rallies. Maybe to them both are the same. Well, they are not. It's also not fair to the invited speakers.
I'm not sure what was told to NH Chan, when they invited him to speak? Did they tell him that he is going to be given 10 minutes only? I'm sure they didn't. He came with a speech nicely typed out and read it word for word, like pronouncing a judgment. He only knew he was given 10 minutes when the moderator started the forum and he was the first speaker. He knew there was no way he could finished the speech in 10 minutes but he soldiered on. Alas, he was literally clapped off the stage by an impatient audience who were more used to political rhetorics than a judge's reasoned judgment. I felt very sorry for him.
It was a well written piece as with all his past writings. It was the way he wrote his judgments. Peppering it with legal stories and anecdotes from the past and quoting from great judges like Lord Denning. But it's not something that an audience who are hungry for fireworks will tolerate for more than 10 minutes.
A written judgment can be a literary work of art, a masterpiece. But alas, now our appellate judges who are tasked with the formation of our law and jurisprudence are now shying away from writing judgments. Maybe it's not surprising, because I think they themselves find it difficult to give reasons to justify some of their blatantly flawed decisions.
Thank you Justice Chan for pronouncing judgments on all who made a mockery of our justice system. If only we have more judges like you. Sigh...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I dont necessarily agree with NH Chan in his critical commentaries about judges, our judges. His writings are reminiscent of his own judgements during his days on the bench - that is to say, 90 % quotes and 10% his processed thoughts. For example, I do not think one should read too much into the prosecutorial deals " he so ably described (Nalla's case). I think it was, in all the circumstances, a fairly tough bargain handled by the PP (Gani), in the performance of his duty to delicately balance the interest of justice and the public interest in seeing that all evidence is presented and proved in court. To do that, a PP has, as do most American district attorneys, wide discretion to present the people's case. I wont make the kind of allegations made by NH Chan. I think, in my own personal view, there is a lot to be said about him too, when he was up there. But the problem is, I am not him. Thanks and be happy.
Abbas
Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now keep it up!
Post a Comment