A few months ago, the then Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Arifin Zakaria, expressed that people should read the judgment before commenting. He emphasised that for every decision made, judges must give their reasons for coming to that decision. In fact, he commented that judges simplify their judgments and also provide a summary of the judgment to aid the public in understanding the reasons for their decision.
To be honest, since I started the Certificate of Legal Practice, I haven’t had much time to keep abreast with the latest developments in the legal sphere. Between reading the latest judgments and studying for the exam, it is an easy decision to choose the latter over the former. Since the exams, I have had time to read judgments amidst my other leisure readings and decided to read the current judgments by the Federal Court.
Now, in the legal field (especially as students), the majority of judgments are obtained from two major portals – LexisNexis and WestLaw. However, subscription to these portals are costly and it is unrealistic to expect the public to pay the subscription to these portals. With the intent of trying to get these judgments to read like the public would, I tried to find other means to download the judgments for free instead of through these portals, since the former Chief Justice commented that the public should read the judgments before judging, it is only reasonable that these judgments be available to the public for free.
I managed to find judgments readily available to the public at no cost at http://www.kehakiman.gov.my/. I decided to read two judgments, one from the Court of Appeal (the criminal case of Syahmie bin Hassan v Public Prosecutor) as well as one from the Federal Court (the civil case of CIMB Bank Berhad v AmBank (M) Berhad & 2 Ors).
Both judgments employed clear language and easy to follow sentence construction and paragraphing. I remember the days reading judgments like the 2011 UK Supreme Court case of Jones v Kernott which I clearly remember being even more confused at the end of the judgment despite rereading numerous paragraphs again and again. For the Malaysian judgments, there is not many legal jargon and the English used is one that is simple for the public to understand. Although criminal cases might reveal some rather disturbing facts, nonetheless the legal principles in both criminal and civil cases were very well articulated, properly formulated, and easy to follow the judge’s train of thoughts and reasoning.
Before dipping my toes into the realm of law, a lot of my outlook on courts and judges with their judgments were all based on the media and what people say. I guess this too is the same with a lot of the public. I agree with the comment by the then Chief Justice Tun Ariffin Zakaria that we should read the judgments before criticising. It is not to say that we cannot disagree. My personal opinion is that as human beings, there is a myriad of factors that affect one’s decision. The development of anything, be it law or even science for that matter, stems from discussion and critique. Academics publish journal articles and subject it to peer review. A piece of art can elicit and evoke different emotions and interpretations from different people. To me, law is no different. Although generally, whatever that the Federal Court decides become binding on lower courts, it does not mean that we must always concur with their views. A good example of the Federal Court overruling its own previous decision was the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San, which overruled the Federal Court’s decision in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Boonsom Boonyanit @ Sum Yoh Eng (this was also detailed in the CIMB Bank v AmBank Berhad case above).
On another note, I’m a proponent of the law becoming understandable and available to the public. The law, be it statutes or case law, affects the public and therefore it is ridiculous (in my opinion) for them to be obscure, incomprehensible, and burdensome to understand. The Latin maxim “ignorantia juris non excusat”, which essentially means ignorance of the law is no excuse, does apply in Malaysia. We cannot go to Court and say “Oh, but I did not know that such laws exists” as a defence. Time and time again, in various courts including at the Federal Court, this has been emphasised that ignorance of the law is no defence. Therefore, with this in mind, I applaud and laud the judiciary’s move to make judgments easier to be accessed, simple to understand with legal jargons only where necessary, yet still thorough and clear with their reasoning and explanations. While thus far I’ve only read two judgments, I intend to read more in my time awaiting my results. Hopefully, the judgments will still be as accessible, simple yet clear.
To be honest, since I started the Certificate of Legal Practice, I haven’t had much time to keep abreast with the latest developments in the legal sphere. Between reading the latest judgments and studying for the exam, it is an easy decision to choose the latter over the former. Since the exams, I have had time to read judgments amidst my other leisure readings and decided to read the current judgments by the Federal Court.
Now, in the legal field (especially as students), the majority of judgments are obtained from two major portals – LexisNexis and WestLaw. However, subscription to these portals are costly and it is unrealistic to expect the public to pay the subscription to these portals. With the intent of trying to get these judgments to read like the public would, I tried to find other means to download the judgments for free instead of through these portals, since the former Chief Justice commented that the public should read the judgments before judging, it is only reasonable that these judgments be available to the public for free.
I managed to find judgments readily available to the public at no cost at http://www.kehakiman.gov.my/. I decided to read two judgments, one from the Court of Appeal (the criminal case of Syahmie bin Hassan v Public Prosecutor) as well as one from the Federal Court (the civil case of CIMB Bank Berhad v AmBank (M) Berhad & 2 Ors).
Both judgments employed clear language and easy to follow sentence construction and paragraphing. I remember the days reading judgments like the 2011 UK Supreme Court case of Jones v Kernott which I clearly remember being even more confused at the end of the judgment despite rereading numerous paragraphs again and again. For the Malaysian judgments, there is not many legal jargon and the English used is one that is simple for the public to understand. Although criminal cases might reveal some rather disturbing facts, nonetheless the legal principles in both criminal and civil cases were very well articulated, properly formulated, and easy to follow the judge’s train of thoughts and reasoning.
Before dipping my toes into the realm of law, a lot of my outlook on courts and judges with their judgments were all based on the media and what people say. I guess this too is the same with a lot of the public. I agree with the comment by the then Chief Justice Tun Ariffin Zakaria that we should read the judgments before criticising. It is not to say that we cannot disagree. My personal opinion is that as human beings, there is a myriad of factors that affect one’s decision. The development of anything, be it law or even science for that matter, stems from discussion and critique. Academics publish journal articles and subject it to peer review. A piece of art can elicit and evoke different emotions and interpretations from different people. To me, law is no different. Although generally, whatever that the Federal Court decides become binding on lower courts, it does not mean that we must always concur with their views. A good example of the Federal Court overruling its own previous decision was the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San, which overruled the Federal Court’s decision in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Boonsom Boonyanit @ Sum Yoh Eng (this was also detailed in the CIMB Bank v AmBank Berhad case above).
On another note, I’m a proponent of the law becoming understandable and available to the public. The law, be it statutes or case law, affects the public and therefore it is ridiculous (in my opinion) for them to be obscure, incomprehensible, and burdensome to understand. The Latin maxim “ignorantia juris non excusat”, which essentially means ignorance of the law is no excuse, does apply in Malaysia. We cannot go to Court and say “Oh, but I did not know that such laws exists” as a defence. Time and time again, in various courts including at the Federal Court, this has been emphasised that ignorance of the law is no defence. Therefore, with this in mind, I applaud and laud the judiciary’s move to make judgments easier to be accessed, simple to understand with legal jargons only where necessary, yet still thorough and clear with their reasoning and explanations. While thus far I’ve only read two judgments, I intend to read more in my time awaiting my results. Hopefully, the judgments will still be as accessible, simple yet clear.
