Saya menyembah salam takziah kepada KDYMM Sultan Muhammad V dan keluarga kerabat Kelantan atas kemangkatan DYMM Sultan Ismail Petra Ibni Almarhum Sultan Yahya Petra.
Semoga roh Almarhum dicucuri rahmat dan ditempatkan di kalangan mereka yang beriman.
28 Muharram 1441
28 September 2019
Transcript Of AG Tommy Thomas’ Speech
Malaysia & Rome Statute _ UM Forum
Venue _ University Malaya
Date _ 27 April 2019
The remarks in red belong to Awakening Moses Wong. Full articles will be written based on (some or all) of the 22 respective comments.
The transcription work was very tedious and time-consuming. Utilizing voice recognition software (70% effective) and the balance of work was done by good old-fashion human effort.
If you spot any errors, kindly update the blogger for updating. My sincere thanks in advance.
Pic Credit to Finance Twitter for the 1st photo.
***************************
Yang Berbahagia Tan Sri Tommy Thomas’ Speech _ 27 April 2019.
Mr. Moderator, ladies and gentlemen.
I thank the organizers for this kind invitation which I am delighted to accept.
It gives us all an opportunity to clarify the legal position of this subject which has become unnecessarily controversial because of deliberate lies and misrepresentation of fact and law.
Truth has been the casualty of the fake news brigade and so I am happy to discuss the relevant provisions truthfully.
What is the Rome Statute all about? And what is the Rome Statute not about?
Comment 1 _ Let us analyse the reasons for non-implementation by the previous Govt.
On the onset, it must be kept in mind that the Cabinet had on 18th March 2011 decided that Malaysia should accede to the Rome Statute.
Although 8 years had passed and that decision was never revoked, it was not implemented either.
Hence, when the Pakatan Government decided to accept Rome Statute, it was really continuing a policy decision previously taken by the previous government.
Comment 2 _ Please provide dates of the AG’s ICC briefing for the cabinet and Pakatan MPs _ Please provide a list of those who supported _ and those who dissented on the decision.
Why did Foreign Minister Saifuddin Abdullah bypass the Parliament _ if Rome Statute had widespread support in Barisan Nasional since 2011?
So the hypocrisy that surrounds this debate must be flashed out; which is the critics of today was supporting the same decision yesterday.
So this was an all-party decision of 8 years ago. Obviously some people have changed their mind.
Unfortunately, some of the discussion – in fact the first 5 minutes will be terribly technical. So I seek your indulgence.
To some extent, this is a heavy legal subject. I cannot do justice without touching on the law. So if you are bored for the next 5 minutes, please forgive me.
Comment 3 _ The ICC is NOT part of the United Nations _ But the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is part of the UN.
The legitimacy and jurisdiction of the ICC is in serious doubt. Why is the AG avoiding or not discussing on this incongruity?
So what is the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that Rome Statute has in mind? To answer that, one turns to the Rome Statute.
One can get this freely from the Internet, it’s on the website, you can download it. So I just read you what Rome Statute is all about.
Article 1 reminds everybody of the jurisdiction of the court – which is it shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern.
And that is elaborated in Article 5, the jurisdiction of the court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole.
So they titled it a bit more because it is now the international community as a whole … as opposed to a regional concern. It must be the entire global community who are upset.
Comment 4 _ Many claimed that there are only 4 crimes _ Many claimed that there is no superseding or overlapping with local laws _ Obviously this is not true _ The deception _ The lies.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/336923D8-A6AD-40EC-AD7B-45BF9DE73D56/0/ElementsOfCrimesEng.pdf
In Article 5, they set out 4 crimes which come under Rome Statute. That is very important to remember, there are only 4 crimes or offenses that come under the jurisdiction of Rome Statute.
1. The crime of genocide. 2. Crimes against humanity. 3. War crimes. 4. The crime of aggression.
If I state those, you would know immediately – anyone with half a brain would be aware that we are talking about the most serious crimes.
Comment 5 _ World War 2 in 1945 was not the catalyst for the creation of the ICC in July 2002 _ The ICC was actually a response to the US-Iraq war in 1990 and 2003 _ The ICC is an attempt to contain the powerful might of the US war machine.
If you know anything about 20th century history – those reading about Hitler and Nazi Germany and the run up to the 2nd World War (1939 – 1945).
You will understand that these crimes really came to the forefront in the the first 3, 4 decades of the 20th century with the Spanish Civil War, the German aggression.
The start of the 2nd World War and Hitler, the concentration camps and genocide, the Holocaust, culminating in the defeat of Germany the 2nd World War and the Nuremberg Tribunal of 1945.
So those were the crimes. So if you stop for a minute and say, how does this crimes apply to domestic life in Malaysia that all of you take part in?
Your everyday life, when you go to work, when you go to school, when you drive around or you go shopping, you asked yourself is your daily life affected by these 4 crimes?
The answer is straightaway, what are you talking about? It is so divorced from reality.
I won’t describe the four (crimes) because of time factor but they give details of genocide, crimes against humanity, crimes against…. (one or two of these articles are very long to show how difficult it is) war crimes and then finally the last article is the crime of aggression.
But you can get all the details in the Rome Statute. So what that means if you look at those definitions is 3 points you can make immediately.
Comment 6 _ Murder, kidnapping, rape, or enforced disappearance _ are included as ICC crimes. Will the AG care to comment on this?
First of all, domestic crimes are not applicable. So if there is a murder or a kidnapping or a rape that may be happening at this moment somewhere in Malaysia – the Rome Statute is not triggered.
Comment 7 _ Malaysia practices separation of powers in our judicial system _ police _ AGC _ court _ Does the ICC practice separation of powers?
So if the police catch the accused, the perpetrator for a murder that is happening at this moment that person is remanded, investigations are done by the police and then
Comment 8 _ If Malaysia joins the ICC _ This is a grevious breach against the Constitution.
We can infer that the AG relinquished his powers contained in the Constitution _ and that the PM is inviting foreign interference into Malaysia’s judicial system.
He is charged by the public prosecutor under the ordinary criminal laws of Malaysia in the ordinary criminal courts of Malaysia, so that has nothing to do with Rome Statute.
Comment 4b _ Many claimed that there are only 4 crimes _ Many claimed that there is no superseding or overlapping with local laws _ Obviously this is not true _ The deception _ The lies.
And then secondly, even when we talk about international crimes, as I said before; it must be of the most serious concern which affects the entire community as I said has been narrowed down to 4 (crimes).
And those 4 crimes as you look at it, you know it is horrific, it is terrible, it is most foul and obviously the international community must be against it.
So therefore, it is absolutely clear that the ICC has a very narrow and limited jurisdiction and then you apply that to Malaysia and you ask ourselves…
I say that because we look at Germany. Let’s take Germany as an example. Germany in the run-up to the second world war during Hitler’s 13 years the 3rd Reich … 1935, 1936 you could see the violence that the state was sponsoring. Leading to 2nd world war and the concentration camps.
Now, if you compare Germany history for 13 years and Malaya’s history, the closest parallel maybe for a few years under the Japanese occupation in the 2nd World War, those who lived here.
They may say, it may bother to some extend. But that was a foreign invasion. But throughout the time when Malaysia have been independent, and run up to Merdeka, we have always been a peaceful country.
Comment 6b _ Murder, kidnapping, rape, or enforced disappearance _ are included as ICC crimes. Will the AG care to comment on this?
So these crimes have absolutely no connection to Malaysia and in fact these offences do not exist on our statute books. These are not crimes under our laws.
They are not crimes under our laws because all the Parliaments before GE14 and all my predecessors (Attorney Generals) in office did not require it to be legislated.
Because there was no need for Malaysian laws for non existent crimes in Malaysia. That’s why we stop there. Now I can go back and sit down. You see.
What was all the fuss about Rome Statute for? What was the fuss? It is just absolutely ridiculous.
Then I just want to dip into 2 other issues quickly.
Comment 9 _ The ratification of the ICC subjugates the Constitution _ The Constitution cannot be violated _ It is sacred like marriage vows.
One there is a principle of complementarity.
Comment 10 _ The Federal Constitution gives legal powers _ for the police to investigate _ and for the Prosecutor to charge.
Federal Constitution Article 145 (3) The Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence.
Comment 8b _ If Malaysia joins the ICC _ This is a grevious breach against the Constitution.
We can infer that the AG relinquished his powers contained in the Constitution _ and that the PM is inviting foreign interference into Malaysia’s judicial system.
Which means the ICC jurisdiction (if you had become a member) would only be triggered when either the Malaysian police does not investigate or the Malaysian Public Prosecutor does not charge.
Comment 11 _ Malaysia practises a separation of powers between the Parliament _ the Judiciary _ and the Executive _ as empowered by the Constitution.
Where does the ICC Court derive its powers from – when the ICC does not have a Parliament to legislate its international laws?
Moreover, the ICC is also NOT part of the United Nations.
If there is a genocide happening in Malaysia after we join Rome (Statute) if genocide occurs in Malaysia, and if the Malaysian Public Prosecutor charges Mr X or Mr Y for genocide in the courts of Malaysia, that is the end of the matter.
So ICC is in a sense a backup. ICC only operates if the Malaysian courts do not do their job. In a sense if we join Rome (Statute) there is a bit of pressure on those who administer justice.
To do the right thing. If they don’t do the right thing, then the international bodies can come in.
So I think that is a good point. Likewise if we join, then we will not be a safe haven for the rogues or the rogues gallery. So I give you the best example.
One of those who are wanted on the ICC list is Omar Al-Bashir of Sudan; the dictator who was there for 35 years and he’s wanted for war crimes.
He’s just been overthrown in a military coup-detat in Sudan. But the Sudanese is claiming that they will try him under Sudan law, which is good.
Comment 12 _ Former US President George Bush _ Former UK PM Tony Blair _ They were found guilty of committing war crimes in Iraq _ by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission _ as established by a former 4th Malaysian PM.
According to Aljazeera _ The tribunal proceedings took place from 19-22 Nov 2011 _ 5 judges including Gurdial Singh Nijar.
Mr. AG _ Please comment _ Does this tribunal have jurisdiction and legitimacy?
The US is not a member of ICC _ The UK is a member of the ICC _ What was the ICC action taken?
Mr. AG _ Was a warrant of arrest ever been issued against Bush or Blair? Why not?
If they try him under Sudan law. Then ICC is not triggered. But, anyway, I don’t think Sudan is a member of ICC.
But the reason I give that example is, if we do not join Rome (Statute) people like Omar Al-Bashir and Robert Mugabe, they can come and visit Malaysia knowing we are a safe haven.
But once we join ICC, then they will be extradited immediately. It will not be attractive anymore.
Comment 13 _ When countries join the ICC _ does it mean that all their PAST sins of war crimes will be forgiven? Does student activist Asheeq Ali wishes to comment?
Finally, any jurisdiction that Rome (Statute) will have if Malaysia joins is prospective. So let’s say Malaysia joins on 1st July 2019, all crimes that only occurred after that would be brought up.
Let’s assume for a minute that there were terrible genocides happening in Malaysia that none of us knew about or Malaysia to part in a war crime that we didn’t know about before 1st July 2019.
They (the ICC) also cannot charge – so it is a prospective position. So when the position is so clear, how did this fake news people confuse the public?
Comment 14 _ In my humble opinion, the immunity of the Agong and Sultans _ was never lost _ it was only hidden by the Almighty.
The 1993 Constitution coup was a total failure _ Please be patient and wait for my article _ I will provide the facts and proof. Nothing less than 2-3 very strong legal points.
That is by falsely talking about the immunity of the Rulers (Sultans). So I have to deal with the immunity of the Rulers in the next 5 minutes.
Comment 15 _ Mr. AG _ Please tell us the truth _ since when did Malaysians elect our Prime Minister? Malaysia’s General Elections is very different from the US or Indonesia.
The YDP Agong (King) is a Constitutional Monarch who must act on the advice of the elected Prime Minister who represents the democratic will of the majority of voters.
Comment 16 _ According to the Federal Constitution _ The PM does not monopolize the giving of advice to the King.
What if the PM’s advice is inferior _ compared to the Federal Court Judges _ or the AG’s advice?
Mr. AG _ Is the King bound to receive advice on Islamic matters from the PM or the AG?
So it’s a Constitutional Monarch and it’s a Parliamentary democracy and the King must accept the advice of the Prime Minister except on very minor matters which is not relevant.
So for example, if war is declared although the Agong (King) the Supreme Commander of our Armed Forces –
The decision to go to war is always made by the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Minister of Defence, and operationally it is the Generals who run the war or Admirals if there is a navy involved.
Comment 17 _ Why is the AG prejudging Malaysia _ and negating a honourable war _
which may be waged in future _ with a just and noble cause _ to defend Malaysia’s sovereignty?
So if Malaysia commits war crimes in a war that Malaysia may enter into tomorrow,
Comment 18 _ Why are you and the clueless politicians sabotaging and paralysing the morale of Malaysia’s armed forces? _ This is bordering on treason.
Can Malaysia send her army to war _ for UN peace-keeping missions _ or to defend Malaysia’s sovereignty _ or to defend our allies?
After that, can we tell our soldiers that they don’t have sovereign immunity _ that Malaysia will surrender our soldiers to be sent to a foreign court _ to be prosecuted for war crimes?
the people who are vulnerable to an ICC prosecution will be the Prime Minister, the Cabinet, the Minister of defence, the Generals but never the King, never the King because he is the Constitutional Monarch.
Comment 12b _ Former US President George Bush _ Former UK PM Tony Blair _ They were found guilty of committing war crimes in Iraq _ by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission _ as established by a former 4th Malaysian PM.
According to Aljazeera _ The tribunal proceedings took place from 19-22 Nov 2011 _ 5 judges including Gurdial Singh Nijar.
Mr. AG _ Please comment _ Does this tribunal have jurisdiction and legitimacy?
The US is not a member of ICC _ The UK is a member of the ICC _ What was the ICC action taken?
Mr. AG _ Was a warrant of arrest ever been issued against Bush or Blair? Why not?
I just give you an example. If all of you remember when Tony Blair led the UK to the illegal invasion and war in Iraq in 2003.
There were calls 1 or 2 years later to charge Blair & Bush (but forget about Bush) not to use the US as an example… (inaudible).
But if you use the UK as an example, all the calls to charge somebody were directed against Prime Minister Tony Blair for making the decision to go to war.
Nobody ever, in the English debate ask for Queen Elizabeth as the Constitutional Monarch and the Supreme Commander of the British forces to be charged for war crimes.
Comment 19 _ Doesn’t the AG know that the UK does not have a written Constitution?
Since when did Queen Elizabeth become a Constitutional monarch when there was never a Constitution in the UK?
And why is that? Because Queen Elizabeth is a Constitutional Monarch just like the YDP Agong (King). That is how silly the argument is.
But let me kill the argument with my strongest point. I will sit down now.
The British colonial powers from the 18th – 19th century certainly since 1874 when they intervened directly in the (Malaya) Federated States.
They recognized the sovereign immunity of the 9 Rulers (Sultans) both nationally and also under international law.
So the British were quite happy to say we recognise the Sultan of Johor, the Sultan of Kedah but they had the Resident System; they had effective power the British that is.
That position continued when Merdeka (Independence) was achieved in 1957 and the Federal Constitution expressly provided in Article 181 that our 9 Rulers (Sultans) could not be sued or be charged in any of our courts.
Comment 20 _ Mr. AG, is this your strongest point? _ Then let me prove you wrong again.
Comment 14b _ In my humble opinion, the immunity of the Agong and Sultans _ was never lost _ it was only hidden by the Almighty for the specific time.
The 1993 Constitutional coup was a total failure _ Please be patient and wait for my article _ I will provide the facts and proof. Nothing less than 2-3 very strong legal points.
And yet in 1993, the Constitution was amended and Part 15 was introduced into the Federal Constitution Article 182 of the Federal Constitution set up the Special Court.
So we have the Special Court which can try all offences committed by the Agong (King), all the Rulers (Sultans) and all the Civil cases by or against the Agong or Rulers (Sultans).
So that tells you that the Agong (King) and the Rulers (Sultans) are now since 1993 vulnerable to legal action both civil and criminal.
Therefore since 1993, they do not have immunity at all in our courts but the only difference is they have a special Court to hear them.
Comment 21 _ Why are you people wrong again? Let me keep the AG guessing for now.
All of us are subjected to the ordinary courts of the land. What is forgotten is that the 8th Schedule to the Federal Constitution was also amended in 1993.
That includes provisions that the state… Constitution was amended when the Ruler (Sultan) is charged with any offence in the Special Court he ceases to exercise the functions of the Ruler (Sultan) pending his case.
And then, if he is convicted for an offence and sentenced to imprisonment for more than one day the Ruler (Sultan) shall cease to be Ruler (Sultan) unless he received a free pardon.
So there is how our law is today, and has been for 25 years. Nothing to do with Rome pre Rome, post Rome, absent Rome, absent Amsterdam, nothing to do with Rome.
Comment 14c _ In my humble opinion, the immunity of the Agong and Sultans _ was never lost _ it was only hidden by the Almighty for the specific time.
The 1993 Constitutional coup was a total failure _ Please be patient and wait for my article _ I will provide the facts and proof. Nothing less than 2-3 very strong legal points.
So I end by saying so if the Agong (King) and the Rulers (Sultans) had already lost their immunity some 25 years ago under Malaysian law and
Of course if the domestic country that’s Malaysia does not give them sovereign immunity, it is impossible for them to claim sovereign immunity in England.
So let’s say if any is one of our Rulers (Sultans) goes to England in fact there’s an actual case in the 19th century.
But if one of our Rulers (Sultans) goes to England and breaches a contract, he cannot now claim sovereign immunity, he will be susceptible to be sued in London.
Because the British Judge was saying, “Well if you don’t have sovereign immunity in your own country; don’t expect me to give you sovereign immunity in my country.”
Comment 22 _ If the AG had given bad advice _ or erroneous facts _ to the King _ and to the Government _ Then, it’s time for your apology to the Malaysian public.
So they just don’t enjoy it. That is the law. It is for these reasons that I have advised the government to rectify Rome statute. From a legal perspective, it would be difficult to argue to the contrary.
I’m sure that my opinion on straightforward reading of what is very clear law will be shared by the vast majority of lawyers who are trained or who are practicing in the Bar or elsewhere.
So I conclude by saying the entire controversy of Rome statute is “Much Ado About Nothing” in so far as the law is concerned. End of speech.
*******************************
It is not my intention to embarrass the Attorney General Tan Sri Tommy Thomas.
Instead, I wish to provide the AG a channel to clarify his statements spoken concerning the Rome Statute at the UM Forum.
Let me be more specific.
In order to win your case, will you allow your legal counsel to lie in court?
Will the government allow its legal counsel (or prosecutors) to lie in court?
The politically correct answer is definitely a no, no, no!
It cannot happen and it must not happen.
That’s why it’s beginning to get really, really scary.
Two sides battling in court because the stakes are very high.
I mean, how do you really know – who’s telling the truth and who’s lying?
One side is presenting the material facts and the other side presenting their juiced-up alternative facts.
Take for example; Malaysia took Singapore to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over the sovereignty dispute of Pedra Branca or Pulau Batu Puteh.
Somehow the Malaysian legal team was caught using discredited evidence.
As a very senior member of the legal team, the (former) Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail was expected to explain the presence of the discredited evidence.
Unfortunately, he had remained silent and never explained to the public why.
The public deserves an explanation of what the ex-AG knew and when he knew.
What was the action that he took in response to the allegation of fake evidence?
How did the strict and stringent “fact-checking” fail – leading to the extreme loss of prestige for Malaysia’s national pride?
Ex-Law Minister (De facto) Nancy Shukri insisted that the AG was not involved.
But she did not deny that fake facts were adduced and cited as evidence in court by the Malaysian side.
Excuse me Datuk Hajah Nancy Shukri – “Then who was really involved?”
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/246941
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/245950
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedra_Branca_dispute
Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin acted as Malaysia’s Co-Agent to the ICJ.
She was providing leadership and co-leading Malaysia’s legal team.
She is also a former ambassador and the co-founder of G25 being the Group of 25 Eminent Persons in Malaysia.
Having such lofty credentials, we had expected so much of her eminence.
Unfortunately she too had failed to provide clarification on the fake evidence.
What actually happens when a lawyer, a deputy public prosecutor, a witness, a party or an accused – commits perjury in court?
Lying in court while under oath could mean submitting false, fake or fabricated facts or giving oral testimony which is patently untrue.
Misleading the panel of judges to secure a favourable court judgment could be an act of contempt which has severe legal consequences.
In my coming articles, we will be moving from “inside” the judicial court to “outside” the court – which is the court of public opinion.
The question is – does the rules of “speaking the truth” apply equally outside the court when you’re not under oath?
Obviously, only the “court of law” has the “legal power” to punish or sanction any offenders.
While the court of public opinion lacks that same “ judicial power”; rest assured that we the public (via social media) have a very long, loooooong ….. memory.
Next stop, we will proceed to “fact-checking” AG Tommy Thomas concerning his statements on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The top government lawyer was seen recently on Facebook with Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin.
This eminent lady still owes the public a long overdue explanation on Pedra Branca.
Maybe Her ladyship is too busy with her new role as a propagandist for Rome Statute.
Jason Leong, the celebrated comedian entertained a very large group of Malaysian lawyers at their annual dinner cum gala ball at the Majestic Hotel Kuala Lumpur.
He said, “It is such an honour and pleasure to perform in front of all my fellow comedians.”
“It was also a happy moment for me to perform in front of Mr Tommy Thomas and Dato’ Ambiga, both of whom are my heroes.”
Seriously, I was holding my breath and waiting for a defamation class-action lawsuit from the Malaysian Bar Council.
Perhaps a small group of offended lawyers would sue this wisecrack and make some easy money.
Yes, I’ve been waiting for nearly 6 months and nothing happened. Zilch. Nada.
Maybe the Malaysian lawyers have conceded that there are indeed some comedians amongst their ranks – but definitely not all of them.
Perang ICC akan tercetus sekali lagi …
Kempen untuk menekan Malaysia meratifikasi Statut Rom Mahkamah Jenayah Antarabangsa (ICC) baru-baru ini telah diaktifkan semula.
Tarikh _ Selasa, 27 Ogos 2019.
Tempat _ Pusat Timbang Tara Asia, Kuala Lumpur.
Pensyarah Forum _ Hakim ICC Chung Chang-Ho.
Penganjur Forum _ Badan Peguam Malaysia
Forum yang melibatkan pegawai-pegawai berpengaruh ini tidak mungkin dianjurkan tanpa pengetahuan tersirat dan terjelas dari Jabatan Perdana Menteri (JPM).
Hanya 5 bulan yang lalu – di bawah pertempuran sengit – PM mengakur kekalahan kepada gabungan anti-Statut Rom dan kemudian secara rasmi menarik diri dari ICC.
Kini – dengan peralihan baru – adakah Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad benar-benar berpegang kepada prinsip dan menunaikan janjinya?
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/489730
Para hadirin adalah termasuk tokoh-tokoh di Mahkamah Persekutuan, Jabatan Peguam Negara, Majlis Peguam dan Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (Suhakam).
Ketua Hakim YAA Dato’ Seri Utama Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat,
Pesuruhjaya Suhakam Datuk Lok Yim Pheng,
Presiden Badan Peguam Datuk Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor,
Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan YA Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Idrus Harun Idrus Harun,
Hakim Mahkamah Rayuan YA Datuk Hasnah Mohammed Hashim dan
Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi YA Datuk Mohd Firuz Jaffril.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/336923D8-A6AD-40EC-AD7B-45BF9DE73D56/0/ElementsOfCrimesEng.pdf
Dalam ucapannya, Hakim Chung Chang-Ho sering mengulas bahawa ICC hanya meliputi 4 jenayah yang paling serius.
Percayakah kamu bahawa hakim ini benar-benar boleh menghitung angka? Satu pencarian maklumat ICC menunjukkan hakikat sebaliknya.
Bahkan ketegangan minda juga disertakan sebagai satu jenayah ICC. Menakjubkan!
Satu P-E-N-I-P-U-A-N tersirat sedang diusahakan… tetapi oleh siapa?
Dengan rendah hati, saya berpendapat bahawa ini adalah satu percubaan masuk pintu-belakang untuk menunduk Perlembagaan Malaysia dan Kanun Keseksaan.
Pensyarah kedua adalah Datuk Sivananthan Nithyanantham. Beliau adalah ahli Badan Peguam Malaysia dan juga Peguam mewakili ICC.
Peguam pakar ini menegaskan bahawa bidang kuasa ICC tidak akan menggantikan (atau ‘mencabar’) kuasa undang-undang Islam atau mahkamah syariah.
Persoalan saya kepada Datuk Sivananthan – apabila Menteri Luar Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah menandatangani perjanjian kepada Statut Rom ICC pada Mar 2019:-
“Adakah ratifikasi ICC itu menundukkan undang-undang Islam Malaysia dan memperuntukkan untuk membicarakan Sultan-Sultan kalau didakwa melakukan sebarang kesalahan?”
“Mengapakah Datuk Saifuddin tidak meminta perundian Parlimen terlebih dahulu kerana perjanjian ICC itu akan mewajibkan Perlembagaan dan undang-undang negara untuk dipinda?”
“Bolehkah peguam ternama ini membuktikan dengan fakta bahawa PENGKIANATAN tidak pernah dilakukan oleh Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Luar?”
Badan Peguam Malaysia Bendahari Surindar Singh, VP Roger Chan Weng Keng, Presiden Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor dan Setiausaha Salim Bashir Bhaskaran. Kredit Malay Mail Yusof Mat Isa. Gambar fail pada 16 Mac, 2019.
Menurut Malaysiakini 28 Ogos 2019, Majlis Peguam telah menyertai Gabungan untuk ICC – yang dilancarkan semula sebagai kumpulan tekanan – untuk menggesa Putrajaya untuk menyertai semula ICC.
Apakah agenda rahsia untuk “Gabungan-untuk-ICC”?
Apakah rancangan perang mereka dan bilakah serangan kejutan dilancarkan?
Saya amat bimbang.
The ICC war is re-starting again…
The campaign to pressure Malaysia to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been newly re-activated.
Date _ Tuesday, 27 August 2019.
Venue _ Asian Arbitration Centre, Kuala Lumpur.
Forum Speaker _ ICC Judge Chung Chang-Ho.
Forum Organizer _ Bar Council
This high powered forum involving top officials could not have been organized without the implicit and explicit knowledge of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).
Just 5 months ago – under heavy fire – the PM conceded defeat to the anti-Rome Statute coalition and then officially withdrew from the ICC.
Now – with the new turn of events – will Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad really keep his principles and his promise?
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/489730
Spotted in the audience were the VVIPs in the Federal Court, Attorney General’s Chambers, Bar Council and Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam).
Chief Justice YAA Dato’ Seri Utama Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat,
Suhakam Commissioner Datuk Lok Yim Pheng,
Bar President Datuk Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor,
Federal Court Justice YA Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Idrus Harun,
Court of Appeal Justice YA Datuk Hasnah Mohammed Hashim and
High Court Judge YA Datuk Mohd Firuz Jaffril.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/336923D8-A6AD-40EC-AD7B-45BF9DE73D56/0/ElementsOfCrimesEng.pdf
In his speech, Judge Chung Chang-Ho reiterated that the ICC looks into only 4 most serious crimes.
Do you believe that this judge can really count numbers? A search of the ICC information showed otherwise.
Even mental harm is included as an ICC crime. “Snowflakes?”
A subtle D-E-C-E-P-T-I-O-N is being employed… but by whom?
In my humble opinion, this is a backdoor attempt to subjugate the Malaysian Constitution and the Penal Code.
The second speaker was Datuk Sivananthan Nithyanantham. He is a member of the Malaysian Bar and the Counsel representing the ICC.
This learned lawyer incredulously claimed that the ICC jurisdiction does not supersede (or ‘challenge’) the power of the Islamic law or the Syariah courts.
My question to Datuk Sivananthan – when Foreign Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah signed the Instrument of Accession to the Rome Statute of ICC in Mar 2019:-
“Did the ICC ratification subjugate the Islamic law of Malaysia and legally provided to prosecute the Sultans if there were any alleged wrongdoing?”
“Why didn’t Datuk Saifuddin seek the prior ‘legislative-vote’ of the Malaysian Parliament as the ICC accession would obligate the Constitution and national laws to be amended?”
“Can the learned lawyer prove with evidence that TREASON had not been committed by the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister?”
Malaysian Bar Treasurer Surindar Singh, VP Roger Chan Weng Keng, President Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor and Secretary Salim Bashir Bhaskaran. Pic Credit Malay Mail Yusof Mat Isa. File photo on March 16, 2019.
According to Malaysiakini 28 Aug 2019, the Bar Council has joined the Coalition for ICC – which was relaunched as a pressure group – to urge Putrajaya to rejoin ICC.
What is the secret agenda for the “Coalition-for-ICC”?
What is their war plan and when will their surprise attacks be launched?
I am very concerned.
Awakening Moses Wong 