Fadzil

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr 😅 relak lah ,mek

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr Memang 😈

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr Nice

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@Solisidtor 🤣🤣🤣

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr Nice 😍

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr Sorry ,ada hal sikit 🙈

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@Solisidtor Akta Antibuli 2026 also require the institution to have a Jawatankuasa to monitor bullying cases & provide regular report to the Ministry.
They have to provide psychiatric counselling to both parties.

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@Solisidtor Syed, remind the Ministers to start implementing the actions under the Akta Antibuli 2026 ,such as appointment of Tribunal, briefing the heads of schools including the Commandant of RMC on their duties.
Duties including creating a private channel of complaints by students etc

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@MCMC_RASMI @bernamadotcom Don't waste your time lah ... guaranteed forgiven by the real power in the current government

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr Siapa arwah Salleh?

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@zaidibrahim Setuju

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@nikhajarr Cash

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@SyedSaddiq Brudder, let us restart the Pandora Box of RMC

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@zaidibrahim Thank you for the highlight

[Zaid Ibrahim @zaidibrahim]

The Attorney General’s claim that a “full pardon from the King means the Anwar “ has never committed any wrong doing or free of any wrongdoing” is both legally unsound and contrary to common sense. At best, a full pardon under Article 42, read with Article 48 of the Federal Constitution, operates to remove the legal disqualification from serving as a Member of Parliament. (This is a debatable point in itself)
It does not and cannot erase the fact of a conviction or overturn the court’s finding of guilt.

In R v Foster [1985] QB 115, the English Court of Appeal made clear that the royal prerogative of mercy “does not overturn the conviction; it only relieves from the consequences of that conviction.” Similarly, in Horwitz v United States 63 F.2d 706 (1933), the U.S. Court of Appeals held that “a pardon is not a declaration of innocence; it is an act of forgiveness which presupposes guilt.” The Canadian Supreme Court in R v Strong (1869) 1 SCR 202 affirmed that the legal record of conviction remains intact despite a pardon.

A prerogative of mercy under Art 42 is distinct from a prerogative of justice: the former forgives the penalty, the latter overturns the verdict. The King’s pardon may restore political eligibility under Article 48, but it does not rewrite judicial history.

There is no established Malaysian or Commonwealth authority supporting the proposition that a pardon transforms a convicted person into one judicially recognised as innocent.

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@rimau_my @nikhajarr The acquittal was based on the technical grounds; the original charge was culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s 304(b) of the Penal Code... difficult
Frankly, I'm not sure we can disclose it here, but we can discuss the case privately

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@rimau_my @nikhajarr We managed to get the official High Court document.. PP vs Muhammad Rohimie AB llah Zawawi (Criminal (Appeal no: 41S-82-06/2012) Decision given by Amelia Tee Hong Geok Abdullah J on 20th April 2014
In a nutshell, the Court affirms the order of acquittal of the respondent

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@rimau_my @nikhajarr Initially,the case was heard at a Magistrate court... juvenile? Surprisingly, the witnesses were not even called ... case dismissed by the magistrate (please note we could not get a copy of the file because it's a juvenile case & we were told only the family can have access.)

[Fadzil @ChiefKutu]

@rimau_my @nikhajarr In this case, apparently there was a settlement out-of-court when the parents took a civil suit against the authorities (not sure of that?); albeit the settlement was confirmed by the lawyer.
He would not give the details.