Are baseless attacks on judges a criminal act?

Question

Accepted Answer

Baseless Attacks on Judges May Constitute Criminal Acts, Threatening Judicial Integrity

Baseless bribery claims and the alleged leaking of court judgments before their official delivery are considered serious matters with potential criminal consequences, according to eight former Malaysian Bar presidents. These actions are seen not only as assaults on individual judges but as fundamental attacks on the entire judiciary, undermining public confidence in the administration of justice. The judiciary itself has confirmed making police reports regarding purported leaked draft judgments in high-profile cases, indicating the gravity with which these incidents are viewed.
Allegations Against SRC Trial Judge Deemed Outrageous and Spurious

Eight former presidents of the Malaysian Bar have vehemently denounced the baseless bribery allegations made against Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, the judge who presided over Datuk Seri Najib Razak's SRC International case. These claims, widely published by a discredited blogger and later reportedly withdrawn by Najib himself, were described as "outrageous and spurious." The former Bar leaders suggested that such false allegations constitute a criminal act, representing a profound and baseless assault not just on the judge but on the integrity of the entire Malaysian judiciary.
Calls for Attorney General to Take Action

In light of these serious accusations and alleged leaks, the former Malaysian Bar presidents have urged Attorney General Tan Sri Idrus Harun to take decisive action. They specifically called for the AG to act against those propagating the untrue bribery claims against the SRC trial judge. Furthermore, they implored the AG to swiftly address the "new and unhealthy phenomenon" of purported court judgments being leaked by a discredited blogger prior to their official delivery, deeming these acts potentially criminal and a stain on the administration of justice.
Judiciary Confirms Police Reports on Leaked Judgments

The Malaysian judiciary has acknowledged the seriousness of the alleged leaks by confirming that police reports have been lodged concerning purported draft judgments. In relation to Najib's SRC appeal, the judiciary stated that a leaked document was an altered draft and that internal investigations were initiated. Similarly, a police report was also lodged concerning a purported written judgment for Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor's case that appeared on the same blogger's site, underscoring the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding its integrity.
Unprecedented Leaks Undermine Confidence in Justice System

The alleged leaking of court judgments before their official pronouncements is viewed as an unprecedented development in Malaysia's judicial history. These acts are seen as deliberate attempts to undermine confidence in the judiciary, potentially threaten judges, and disrupt the fair administration of justice. The former Bar presidents stressed that such practices, if left unchecked, could have a corrosive effect on the justice system and must be stopped to preserve the rule of law and public trust.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Are baseless attacks on judges a criminal act?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends