PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal here on Wednesday ruled that a remand order against a lawyer who was remanded 11 years ago for refusing to reveal the whereabouts of a client accused of committing apostasy, was valid.
Justice Datuk Md Raus Shariff who presided over the hearing with Justices Datuk Sulong Mat Jeraie and Datuk Ahmad Ma'arop said they were unanimous in their decision that the High Court had ruled correctly on the legality of the remand order made by the Magistrate's Court.
In dismissing Leonard Teoh Hooi Leong's appeal, Justice Md Raus said the High Court Judge was right in holding that the remand order against Leonard was made within the law.
Leonard, 68, had appealed against the Johor Baru High Court's dismissal of his application to revise the Pontian Magistrate's decision granting the police an order to remand him after he refused to reveal the whereabouts of his client, Nor'aishah Bokhari.
The High Court's decision was on Jan 19 1998.
Leonard was retained by Nor'aishah, now 37 years, to advise her on her conversion to Christianity after she fell in love with a Chinese man, and on her instructions prepared for her a statutory declaration renouncing Islam, which she duly affirmed before a commissioner for oaths on Oct 22, 1997. On Jan 14 1998, the Pontian Magistrate's Court ordered Leonard be held on remand a seven-day period and on Jan 20 1998 the remand order was extended by another three days.
He was released by the police on Jan 22 1998.
Leonard, who was present in court, has another chance to bring up the case by way of review after the Court of Appeal on April 17, in former national athletics coach C. Ramanathan's case, ruled that it can review its own decision.
Leonard's counsel Karpal Singh and Ram Karpal Singh when asked about this, said they had not decided yet on the review application but were thinking about it.
In his affidavit to support his application to revise the remand order, Leonard said he acted for Nor'aishah in an appplication for habeas corpus against the latter's parents, brother and uncle.
He said Nor'aishah resided with her parents in Pontian, Johor, when the habeas corpus application was pending but left her parents' house on the night of Dec 30 1997.
He said that on Jan 1 1998, he was instructed by Nor'aishah to commence legal proceedings restraining her parents, brother and uncle from harassing her and was given specific instructions not to reveal her whereabouts to anyone. He said a police report was subsequently lodged and he was asked to give a statement at the Dang Wangi police headquarters.
When he turned up at the station, he was asked to reveal the whereabouts of Nor'aishah but he refused, claiming that such information was privileged under Section 126 of the Evidence Act 1950, he said.
Leonard said he was then informed by a police officer that he was under arrest for aiding and abetting a kidnapping under Section 365 of the Penal Code and was subsequently produced before the Pontian Magistrate's Court on Jan 14 1998.
At Wednesday's proceedings, Karpal submitted that the remand order was unlawful and an abuse of the court's power as this was a case of a lawyer representing his client being arrested.
"Leonard was remanded after he refused to reveal his client's whereabouts. Without regard to the fact and circumstances that the communications between Leonard and Nor'aishah were privileged and that the order was unlawful," Karpal said, adding that the court should allowed the appeal to clear Leonard's name.
Karpal also said, the Court of Appeal in 2002, in allowing Leonard's leave to appeal had said that if the police wanted information from the counsel regarding the whereabouts of his client, there were other ways and to remand Leonard was an abuse of power.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Ahmad Bache said Leonard was remanded to facilitate police's investigation in Nor'aishah's kidnapping case under Section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code and that the magistrate's finding was made after scrutinising the evidence by the investigation officer as well as from the police investigation diary.
"If the court allows this appeal, the court will open the floodgates to any person who has been remanded to seek revision," he said, adding the defence's submissions to clear Leornard's name was not before this court, but it should by a way of civil action.
No comments:
Post a Comment