WASHINGTON (July 12): Oracle Corp lost its legal challenge to the Pentagon’s US$10 billion cloud contract on Friday, clearing the way for the government to... [...]
Sarawak Pakatan Harapan chief Chong Chieng Jen speaks to reporters in Kuching July 13 2019. — Picture by Sulok Tawie
KUCHING, July 13 — The Sarawak Pakatan Harapan (PH) is hopeful that “big fishes” in Malaysia’s largest state will soon be reeled in for corruption.Its chief Chong Chieng Jen today urged the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to expedite its investigations after its chief Latheefa Koya indicated to reporters here yesterday that there were some “YBs” under scrutiny without disclosing their identities.The “YB” honorific is short for “Yang Berhormat”, which is a form of address to lawmakers.“Sarawakians have waited long enough for the investigation to be carried out and to come to conclusion,” Chong told reporters before chairing the Sarawak PH organising committee for a fundraising dinner at the end of this month.“Those suspected to have committed corruption must be charged in court,” said Chong, who is also the deputy minister of domestic trade and consumer affairs.He said Sarawak PH welcomes the statement, adding that he personally lodged a few reports in the past with the MACC against a few big fishes, but does not know the status of the reports.“Like any Sarawakian, I am also waiting anxiously for my reports to be carried out and to come to conclusion,” he said.Chong, who is also the Sarawak DAP chairman, however, said he will leave it to the MACC to complete its investigation on the reports that he has lodged.He noted that there are positive changes in the MACC under a new leadership regarding reports lodged with the anti-graft agency.He said the changes are in line with the PH election manifesto which pledged to get rid of corruption involving high profile personalities in the country.“I can assure the people of Sarawak that such changes are slowly, but certainly coming.“It may not be as fast as the people hope, but slowly and steady, it is happening,” he said. [...]
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court heard that the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) initially rejected Aset Kayamas Sdn Bhd's application to purchase two plots of its land as it had been slated for other purposes, but this was later approved by a committee chaired by Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor. [...]
SYDNEY (Reuters) - Ash Barty has raised Australian hopes of a first Wimbledon singles title since 2002 by storming into the fourth round of the championships but the world number one has also managed to calmly dodge a rash of potential controversies in week one. [...]
Suaram executive director Sevan Doraisamy today expressed disappointment over the Court of Appeal’s decision to uphold graphic artist Fahmi Reza’s conviction under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 for uploading a clown-face caricature of then-prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak onto his social media account. ― Picture by Farhan Najib
KUALA LUMPUR, July 6 — Suaram executive director Sevan Doraisamy today expressed disappointment over the Court of Appeal’s decision to uphold graphic artist Fahmi Reza’s conviction under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 for uploading a clown-face caricature of then-prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak onto his social media account.“Article 10 of the Federal Constitution provides for freedom of expression which can and should only be limited in circumstances where it poses a threat to national security,” he said in a statement today.Sevan said it was absurd to argue that the political satire by Fahmi can pose a threat to national security and that the initial charges made against him in 2016 was a clear act intended to silence dissent.“The Attorney General Chambers and the Pakatan Harapan administration must answer for the continued failure to uphold freedom of expression as promised by the Pakatan Harapan manifesto.“Pakatan Harapan did not start the prosecution, but they will be accountable for their failures to stand and defend the freedom of expression as enshrined within Article 10 of the Federal Constitution,” he added.The appeal was struck off in a unanimous decision yesterday by a three-member Court of Appeal bench led by Justice Kamardin Hashim, who sat with Justices Kamaludin Md Said and Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah.Kamardin said the panel found that the appeal by Fahmi had no merit and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court which, he said, were supported by the testimony of prosecution witnesses.Fahmi, 41, was charged with improper use of network facilities by creating communication that was offensive with an intention to annoy other people through his Facebook account, “Fahmi Reza” on February 8, 2016.He was charged under Section 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (Act 588), punishable under Section 233(3) of the same Act, which carries a maximum fine of RM50,000, or jail not exceeding one year or both on conviction.The prosecution had filed an appeal against the November 12, 2018 decision of the Ipoh High Court in setting aside Fahmi’s one-month jail sentence and reducing his fine from RM30,000 to RM10,000 after allowing his appeal on the sentence.Fahmi also filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal to set aside the conviction.On January 15 this year, the prosecution withdrew its appeal for a higher sentence against Fahmi Reza after his appeal to quash the conviction.On February 20 last year, the Ipoh Sessions Court sentenced Fahmi to one month jail and fined him RM30,000 after finding him guilty of the charge. [...]
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad — Bernama file photo
PUTRAJAYA: Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s judicial review to challenge the validity of the appointment of two former top judges has come to an end as the Federal Court here today dismissed his application for leave to appeal.
Following the dismissal of his application, Dr Mahathir cannot proceed with his appeal to the Federal Court.
Justice Datuk Rohana Yusuf who chaired a three-member bench, held that there were no more live issues on the two top judges’ appointment as the Federal Court had already decided in the Malaysian Bar case.
She said the court saw no reason to depart from the Federal Court’s decision in the Malaysian Bar case.
The other two judges were Datuk Mohd Zawawi Salleh and Tan Sri Idrus Harun.
On Sept 24, last year, the Federal Court declined to answer four constitutional questions concerning the appointment of former Chief Justice Tun Raus Sharif and former Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin after ruling that the matter was academic since they had resigned from their posts in July, last year.
The Malaysian Bar and the Advocates Association of Sarawak (AAS), in their legal challenge, had posed those four questions of law for determination by the Federal Court.
The Bar and AAS had questioned whether the appointment of Raus and Zulkefli as additional judges in 2017 was constitutional. The two were made additional judges after they reached the constitutional mandatory retirement age of 66 years and six months, before they went on to re-assume the top posts.
In Dr Mahathir’s case, he had filed two applications for leave to commence a judicial review to challenge the appointment and extension of the two judges’ terms.
However, the applications were dismissed by the High Court on Nov 16, 2017 and by the Court of Appeal on Feb 25, this year.
In the proceedings today, Dr Mahathir’s counsel Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla said the premier wished to proceed with the appeal on points of law for future guidance to the executive on the constitutionality of such appointment.
Senior federal counsel Alice Loke Yee Ching urged the court to dismiss the leave to appeal, saying that the matter was academic since both judges had departed from their posts. – Bernama
The post Federal Court dismisses Dr Mahathir’s leave to appeal appeared first on Borneo Post Online. [...]
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court won’t revive Alabama’s attempt to ban the most commonly used procedure in second-trimester abortions after the measure was blocked by lower courts.
The justices on Friday rejected the state’s appeal and declined to review a lower court ruling that blocked the law. The 2016 Alabama law sought to ban the abortion procedure known as dilation and evacuation, a procedure Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall referred to in court filings as “dismemberment abortion.”
Lower courts have blocked similar laws in Kansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Texas and Arkansas, but this was the first case to go before the Supreme Court, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the Alabama law.
Court records show 93% of abortions in Alabama occur before 15 weeks of pregnancy. For the 7% of abortions that occur later, almost all are by dilation and evacuation.
Randall Marshall, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, said the ban would have effectively ended access to second trimester abortions in Alabama if it had been allowed to take effect.
“We are not surprised by the Supreme Court’s decision to deny reviewing this case. In doing so, they are upholding the Supreme Court’s own precedent in protecting a woman’s right to access the healthcare she needs. A woman’s health, not Alabama politicians, should drive personal medical decisions,” Marshall said.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who supports overturning the Roe v. Wade decision that first declared abortion rights, did not dissent from the decision to pass on the Alabama case, but described the abortion procedure at issue as “particularly gruesome.”
“The notion that anything in the Constitution prevents States from passing laws prohibiting the dismembering of a living child is implausible,” Thomas said.
Two Alabama abortion clinics and the ACLU had challenged the 2016 law in court.
U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson found that it would amount to a virtual ban on abortion in the state after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Thompson’s ruling blocking the law, but two of the three judges on the panel said they voted to affirm only because they are bound by past Supreme Court decisions in support of abortion rights.
The Friday decision comes as some conservative states are seeking to enact far-reaching restrictions on abortion.
Alabama lawmakers this year passed a law that would ban almost all abortions in the state, in the hopes of sparking a new court case that might prompt justices to revisit Roe. That near-total abortion ban, which is slated to take effect in November, is facing a challenge in court.
Marshall said the Friday decision on the procedure ban is perhaps a sign that justices, “are not ready to go in and make sweeping changes.”
The Supreme Court still is likely to hear an election year case involving abortion, a challenge to a Louisiana law that requires doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. A district judge who barred the state from enforcing the law found it would close one or two of the state’s three abortion clinics.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law and would have let it take effect pending a Supreme Court appeal. But the justices kept the law on hold in a 5-4 vote in February, pending a full review of the case.
Louisiana was among 21 states that urged the high court to hear the Alabama case. The other states, like Louisiana, have passed sweeping abortion restrictions, including an abortion ban as early as six weeks when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. [...]
KUALA LUMPUR: Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor’s graft case relating to a RM5mil bribe over a solar hybrid system will be heard by the High Court. [...]
Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor arrives at the Kuala Lumpur Court Complex May 10, 2019. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa
KUALA LUMPUR, June 28 — The case of Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, wife of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, over a solar hybrid project for rural schools in Sarawak will be heard in the High Court.High Court Judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali allowed an application by the prosecution, represented by DPP Ahmad Akram Gharib, to transfer the case from the Sessions Court.Ahmad Akram informed the court earlier that Rosmah’s counsel, Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kader, did not object to the application.The date of the case management is to be determined later.On April 10 last year, Rosmah, 68, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having received gratification of RM5 million from Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd managing director Saidi Abang Samsudin, 60, through her aide Datuk Rizal Mansor.She was allegedly given the money for assisting Jepak Holdings to obtain a solar hybrid project for 396 rural schools in Sarawak through direct negotiations with the Education Ministry.She allegedly committed the offence at her home on Jalan Langgak Duta, Taman Duta here, on December 20, 2016. — Bernama [...]
SYDNEY (Reuters) - Sacked Australia fullback Israel Folau is set to take his legal fight against Rugby Australia to court after emerging "very disappointed" from a failed conciliation hearing at the Fair Work Commission (FWC) in Sydney on Friday. [...]
KUALA LUMPUR (June 28): Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor's second bribery case involving the solar panel project in Sarawak has been transferred to the High Court.
WASHINGTON (June 24): The U.S. Supreme Court said owners of vulgar and lewd product names can get federal trademark protection, ruling that a century-old restriction... [...]
Adidas has been unsuccessful in an attempt to expand its trademark three-stripe...
The post Adidas fails to protect its three-stripe motif in European court appeared first on Marketing Magazine Asia. [...]
Fifty-five pages of texts between Fox News host Sean Hannity and former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort make their way online. [...]
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here has affirmed the conviction against former executive chairman of Megan Media Holdings for submission of false information about the group's revenue to Bursa Malaysia 12 years ago. [...]
China said former Interpol President Meng Hongwei pleaded guilty to taking bribes, state media said Thursday, months after going missing during a visit to his home country.
Meng stood trial in a Tianjin municipal court on charges he accepted bribes of 14.5 million yuan ($2.1 million) between 2005 and 2017, the official Xinhua News Agency said. China previously removed him from his government post as vice public security minister over violations that included taking bribes and abusing power, and expelled him from the Communist Party.
The disappearance and secretive investigation into the international law enforcement agency’s first Chinese president has shined a light on China’s opaque legal system and raised questions about its respect for international norms. Details about investigation into Meng’s finances have trickled out in Chinese state media since his disappearance in September.
Meng used his position to seek employment for his wife, Grace, and connived to use his authority for personal gain, China’s Central Commission for Discipline Inspection said in December.
Grace Meng said her husband worked at Interpol headquarters in Lyon, France, and was reported missing on Sept. 29. The Ministry of Public Security in Beijing said in October that he was being investigated on allegations including the acceptance of bribes and violation of other Chinese laws.
Reuters reported in January that Grace Meng had applied for asylum in France because she feared for her life after being followed by strangers, receiving suspicious phone calls and having her car license plates photographed by mysterious people.
The post Ex-Interpol chief pleads guilty to bribery in China court appeared first on The Malaysian Reserve. [...]