YOURSAY Based on lawyer Shafee's definition, Khir Toyo is a king to be served and not an elected civil servant to serve.'
No prima facie case, says Khir Toyo's lawyer
Hang Babeuf: "In his oral submission before the three-member bench at the Appellate Court today, Khir's lawyer Shafee Abdullah contended that as the charge was corruption as a public servant, the prosecution had never proven conclusively that Khir was one, arguing that the definition of a public servant under the Penal Code does not extend to MBs.
"At best, he argued, an MB is the executive of government of the state but that does not make him a public servant."
This is drivel. It is as if I, on being charged with plagiarism and dismissed from my university lectureship, were to respond: no, sorry, you are mistaken, the accusation is misplaced. I plagiarised that other author's work not in my role as a university lecturer but as a scholar, working at home.
Kee Thuan Chye: How can a menteri besar not be a public servant? This defies common sense. Then what kind of servant is Mohd Khir Toyo?
Or is he a ‘towkay' lording over the people? That's the BN perception, isn't it? Cut out the semantics and argue on the point of justice.
Survivor: Khir Toyo's lawyer Shafee Abdullah is indeed a devil's advocate. Any elected representative in the government is in the civil service. They are the people's representative to govern and to legislate, and above all to serve the rakyat.
The civil service officers are servants of the rakyat as well. Their roles are to ensure that the rakyat's calls are attended to.
Based on Shafee's definition, Khir is a king to be served and not an elected civil servant to serve. By sheer logic, Shafee is just another government dog, unleashed and barking with his own sets of rules.
Cantabrigian: Who is paying the salary of the menteri besar? The money comes from the rakyat, not some private organisation. He took oath of office in front of the sultan, the head of the people in Selangor.
He is a public servant. Shafee Abdullah is trying to win on weird technicalities, again.
Bumiasli: If Khir was not a public servant, who paid his salary? Who appointed him and who was he supposed to serve?
Since when the menteri besar's job not related to the public. Are you saying that just because of this case, the law is going to change? In that case, the premier is also not public servant.
Wira: No wonder, Umno leaders are arrogant and corrupt. They never think of themselves as public servants. Perhaps that's the reason why they are behaving like lords when it comes to public money.
The big bungalow is a fact. That the former menteri besar paid little for the luxury is also a fact. To most Malaysians, that is a prima facie case against Khir Toyo.
Ben-ghazi: Of course, Khir was not a civil servant as the MB is not a civil service job. But definitely he is a public servant, given that he serves the public as an elected representative, who is paid from taxpayers' money.
He is definitely not a CEO (chief executive officer) of a company; if he was, then we agree he is not a public servant as he would be paid from revenue of the company. What kind of lawyer is this?
Lim Chong Leong: By using a lot of bombastic English words, Court of Appeal justice Abu Samah Nordin could get confused and may allow the counsel the benefit of the doubt. Such is the standard of our guardians of justice.
Anyway, if the MB is using public funds or administering public property, he falls into the category of being a public servant. Otherwise, he has no business touching our money or property.
S Tan: By the same logic, it means all elected representatives of the BN government are not public servants. So it allows them to plunder the country's wealth and to be corrupt with impunity?
Moontime: The crux of the matter is this: the former MB was in a position of power. He abused that power to commit a corrupt act. Simple as that. The evidence were all there for people to see.
If he is acquitted, then we know the system is flawed. Big fish get away scot-free while the small fishes wither away under the full brunt of the law.
I hope he goes to jail and suffer the indignity of a convict. Next time, don't humiliate other people (remember the broom affair?). Now you're paying the price for it in more ways than one.
Podeh: Lawyers can twist and turn; here's an example:
Lawyer: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Did you check the blood pressure?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Did you check for breathing?
No prima facie case, says Khir Toyo's lawyer
Hang Babeuf: "In his oral submission before the three-member bench at the Appellate Court today, Khir's lawyer Shafee Abdullah contended that as the charge was corruption as a public servant, the prosecution had never proven conclusively that Khir was one, arguing that the definition of a public servant under the Penal Code does not extend to MBs."At best, he argued, an MB is the executive of government of the state but that does not make him a public servant."
This is drivel. It is as if I, on being charged with plagiarism and dismissed from my university lectureship, were to respond: no, sorry, you are mistaken, the accusation is misplaced. I plagiarised that other author's work not in my role as a university lecturer but as a scholar, working at home.
Kee Thuan Chye: How can a menteri besar not be a public servant? This defies common sense. Then what kind of servant is Mohd Khir Toyo?
Or is he a ‘towkay' lording over the people? That's the BN perception, isn't it? Cut out the semantics and argue on the point of justice.
Survivor: Khir Toyo's lawyer Shafee Abdullah is indeed a devil's advocate. Any elected representative in the government is in the civil service. They are the people's representative to govern and to legislate, and above all to serve the rakyat.
The civil service officers are servants of the rakyat as well. Their roles are to ensure that the rakyat's calls are attended to.
Based on Shafee's definition, Khir is a king to be served and not an elected civil servant to serve. By sheer logic, Shafee is just another government dog, unleashed and barking with his own sets of rules.
Cantabrigian: Who is paying the salary of the menteri besar? The money comes from the rakyat, not some private organisation. He took oath of office in front of the sultan, the head of the people in Selangor.
He is a public servant. Shafee Abdullah is trying to win on weird technicalities, again.
Bumiasli: If Khir was not a public servant, who paid his salary? Who appointed him and who was he supposed to serve?
Since when the menteri besar's job not related to the public. Are you saying that just because of this case, the law is going to change? In that case, the premier is also not public servant.
Wira: No wonder, Umno leaders are arrogant and corrupt. They never think of themselves as public servants. Perhaps that's the reason why they are behaving like lords when it comes to public money.
The big bungalow is a fact. That the former menteri besar paid little for the luxury is also a fact. To most Malaysians, that is a prima facie case against Khir Toyo.
Ben-ghazi: Of course, Khir was not a civil servant as the MB is not a civil service job. But definitely he is a public servant, given that he serves the public as an elected representative, who is paid from taxpayers' money.
He is definitely not a CEO (chief executive officer) of a company; if he was, then we agree he is not a public servant as he would be paid from revenue of the company. What kind of lawyer is this?
Lim Chong Leong: By using a lot of bombastic English words, Court of Appeal justice Abu Samah Nordin could get confused and may allow the counsel the benefit of the doubt. Such is the standard of our guardians of justice.
Anyway, if the MB is using public funds or administering public property, he falls into the category of being a public servant. Otherwise, he has no business touching our money or property.
S Tan: By the same logic, it means all elected representatives of the BN government are not public servants. So it allows them to plunder the country's wealth and to be corrupt with impunity?
Moontime: The crux of the matter is this: the former MB was in a position of power. He abused that power to commit a corrupt act. Simple as that. The evidence were all there for people to see.
If he is acquitted, then we know the system is flawed. Big fish get away scot-free while the small fishes wither away under the full brunt of the law.
I hope he goes to jail and suffer the indignity of a convict. Next time, don't humiliate other people (remember the broom affair?). Now you're paying the price for it in more ways than one.
Podeh: Lawyers can twist and turn; here's an example:
Lawyer: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Did you check the blood pressure?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Did you check for breathing?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: How can you be so sure, doctor?
Witness: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
Lawyer: But could the patient still be alive nevertheless?
Witness: It is possible that he could have been alive and practising law somewhere.
Lawyer: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: How can you be so sure, doctor?
Witness: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
Lawyer: But could the patient still be alive nevertheless?
Witness: It is possible that he could have been alive and practising law somewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment