If Rayer pursues with defending the accused, the net result will be a Tandoori court where it’d be better to get two fighter cocks to determine the case outcome instead of watching two lawyers make Tandoori Chickens out of Malaysians.
Seriously, how would one not expect there to be a conflict of interest?
Being a component party within the ruling coalition and with heavy representation in government, the DAP is likely to have a big say in who gets to prosecute the accused.
Under the circumstances, is it not possible that the DAP would be incentivised to get the accused off the hook by manipulating both the prosecution and the defence?
Would Rayer’s representation of the accused not pave the way for both the prosecution and defence to perform legal theatrics with the intent of helping the accused escape?
How is this not obvious to Fareed?
SUBANG JAYA: The Malaysian Bar’s defence of Jelutong MP RSN Rayer’s right to represent a man accused of selling MyKad to Chinese nationals is as laughable as it is peculiar.
According to Bar president Dato’ Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor, it is a constitutional guarantee that every accused person is entitled to be defended by a lawyer of his own choice, regardless of how heinous the crime may be.
“In support of this are the professional standards imposed on an advocate and solicitor to perform his duties, to put forward the best representation possible for his or her client.
“The independence of an advocate and solicitor to act for a client without fear or favour is fundamental to the administration of justice.
“Any unwarranted interference with the discharge of such duties is a serious violation of the independence of the legal profession, and an affront to the administration of justice,” he said.
True.
As a matter of fact, I myself pointed this out when referring to a police report Ramasamy threatened to lodge against a law firm representing Dr Zakir Naik after having received a second notice of demand from Zakir.
I noted how idiotic it would be for Ramasamy to do so as everyone in Malaysia reserved the right to legal representation no matter what the cause or circumstances were.
I added:
The purpose of such representation is to ensure that one is assisted in court by an advocate who is well versed with court proceedings, legal terminology and processes that can be extremely confusing.
Even if you’re accused of committing murder or rape, you have the right to legal representation. It is also the right of any legal firm to offer representation to any willing party no matter what the nature of the charge, conflict or accusation involving that party is.
Having proper representation prevents you from losing a case due to technicalities and helps ensure that all factors are duly considered by the court of law.
For Ramasamy to lodge a police report against a law firm representing Zakir just because the firm sent him a legal letter makes no sense whatsoever, both legally and logically.
Someone needs to explain to Ramasamy that a legal letter is generally issued by an advocate for the purpose of making a demand or soliciting an agreement on behalf of his (or her) client.
To accuse an advocate of harbouring a different kind of intent or acting in a way that runs contrary to law or legal ethics – which is precisely what Ramasamy did – is unprofessional, prejudiced, slanderous and tarnishes the reputation of the said advocate.
However, the case of Rayer is not so simple.
When news broke that the Jelutong Member of Parliament (MP) would represent the person accused of selling fake MyKads to Chinese nationals, it struck me as weird that he should be the one to do it.
That’s because the accused will be prosecuted by the Government of Malaysia (GoM), which happens to be run by MPs and Senators from Pakatan Harapan.
Rayer is from Pakatan Harapan.
Unless he is in disagreement with the MPs and (or) Senators, we can safely assume that his position on the MyKad issue is the same as the GoMs position on the matter.
However, the same GoM is now going to pick a prosecution lawyer to face off with Rayer on the matter (see diagram below).
This raises a red flag, as it is now suspect that Rayer and the DAP are up to no good.
This is considering that the DAP has long been accused of masterminding an illegal citizenship scheme to grant Chinese nationals fake MyKads.
READ: Isu jual MyKad: Bagaimana pentadbiran DAP jadikan Pulau Pinang ‘syurga’ Hong Kong
If Rayer pursues with defending the accused, the net result will be a Tandoori court where it’d be better to get two fighter cocks to determine the case outcome instead of watching two lawyers make Tandoori Chickens out of Malaysians.
Seriously, how would one not expect there to be a conflict of interest?
Being a component party within the ruling coalition and with heavy representation in government, the DAP is likely to have a big say in who gets to prosecute the accused.
Under the circumstances, is it not possible that the DAP would be incentivised to get the accused off the hook by manipulating both the prosecution and the defence?
Would Rayer’s representation of the accused not pave the way for both the prosecution and defence to perform legal theatrics with the intent of helping the accused escape?
How is this not obvious to Fareed?
And if indeed Fareed is all about “the independence of an advocate and solicitor to act for a client without fear or favour,” where was he when Ramasamy threatened to lodge a police report against the law firm representing Zakir?
RJ RITHAUDEEN
FOLLOW US ON TELEGRAM AND TWITTER:
TELEGRAM: Raggie Jessy Rithaudeen (click here)
TELEGRAM: Rosdzaman Dato’ Hj Mohd Yusup
TELEGRAM: Norismail Sarbini
TWITTER: Raggie Jessy Rithaudeen (click here)
WEBSITE: raggiejessyrithaudeen.com
