What Illegal Detention?

In another blatant attempt to paint a bad picture on the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commision (MACC), lawyer and also DAP Member of Parliament Ramkarpal Singh agreed with Tokong Lim Guan Eng that the detention of Mr So-What Phee Boon Poh was illegal and said such remark is justified.

He said the MACC’s statement asking Lim Guan Eng to apologise for calling it an ‘illegal detention’ within 48 hours is ill-advised “as there can be no doubt that the said statement was made having regard to the prevailing circumstances.”

MACC had earlier asked the Tokong to apologise or action shall be taken against him.  The statement said that it was clear in the audio and video taken during a press conference that the Tokong actually said “illegal detention by the MACC.”

‘Detention’ here is referred to the detention made after the remand order was received from the Magistrate.  This remand order was then set aside by the High Court as it contravened Section 117 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

In his ruling, High Court judicial commissioner (JC) Abdul Wahab Mohamed found that the word ‘shall’ in subsection 5 is mandatory, and the respondent has not submitted literature to the contrary.

The subsection says the magistrate deciding the period of detention of the accused shall allow representations to be made either by the accused himself or through a counsel of his choice.

Phee’s lawyers, Ramkarpal Singh and RSN Rayer, had argued that they were not given a chance by the senior assistant registrar of the Magistrate’s Court on Saturday to air their submissions.

Ramkarpal argued that the Magistrate’s Court senior assistant registrar had been prejudiced by allowing the five-day remand without hearing the defence of the accused lawyers.

“Wahab’s decision on 14 August 2017, which ruled that the detention of the trio was illegal since it was based on an invalid order, meant that MACC had detained them illegally after the first 24 hours of their initial arrest on 11 August 2017 passed,” Ramkarpal said.

“In the circumstances, there can be no doubt that the chief minister was justified in describing the said detention as illegal,” he added.

MACC also contended that any remark made by anyone pertaining to the issue is subjudicial and is in contempt of court as the appeal against the quashing of the remand order is already in process.

Ramkarpal said neither himself nor Phee had received a copy of the notice, and were not aware that such a notice had been filed, therefore the issue of sub judice should not arise.

My question is, how can a remand order made and signed by a Magistrate be illegal?  Just because the Magistrate erred in his issuing the remand order does not make the detention illegal.  It only means that the remand order has an error, but the detention was made in pursuant of the remand order issued by a Court of law.

When filing the notice of appeal with the Registrar of Court, the MACC does not need send a notice of appeal to Phee Boon Poh or his counsel.  It is only later when the appeal is not rejected that the Court of Appeal shall notify the parties involved of the time and place for the hearing of the appeal.  This is provided for in the Courts of Judicature Act, 1964.

And as Phee Boon Poh is still under investigation and was released only from remand and not freed from a prison sentence, any statement made pertaining to his detention is sub judice in nature.

This is something Ramkarpal who is an officer of the Court by virtue that he is a legal practitioner ought to know and uphold.

But of course, he is also a DAP Member of Parliament.  People from the DAP do not abide by laws of the land and behave like outlaws.

And it is because of this behaviour that Sungai Lembu has cancer occurrences that are 2,343 percent higher than the national average, and this is what the DAP is trying to stop the MACC from investigating, and trying to stop the MACC from protecting the lives of the people who had voted for Pakatan.