Relevance of sub judice in Malaysia

I REFER to Attorney General Tan Sri Tommy Thomas’ statement at a press conference recently that he believes in freedom of speech and does not subscribe to the principle of sub judice, (TheStarTV.com; online at https://bit.ly/37Zvgqq).

According to him, the principle of sub judice is appropriate for countries like the United Kingdom where jury trials are held.

The rationale is that juries, which comprise lay people, can be influenced by statements made outside the court, such as in the print, electronic or Internet media.

We no longer have jury trials in Malaysia. Court cases here are

all adjudicated and the verdict decided by a qualified judge or judges who, by their training, would only take into consideration evidence that has been raised, argued and stood the test of cross examination in court.

The judges would ignore statements made outside the court.

It is time for our Parliament to amend the law to correct this anomaly to prevent anyone from taking advantage of this loophole.

M. GANESHADEVA , Kuala Lumpur