By THE LEGAL EAGLE

There has been for a long time, a compelling cry by a growing number of Malaysians in a quest to seek justice over wrongdoings, abuses and atrocities suffered by them for which they have yet to see the light of day.

For these victims of injustice, their cries have not been heard, and therefore they cry in silence, not having any way of finding justice though there is supposedly a fair and just judicial system in place to dispense justice to every Malaysian.

This schism, or the fault lines, where Malaysians have no access to justice is a quirky issue which needs to and can only be understood by going to the ground of the prevailing realities involving law enforcement agencies and Malaysia’s judiciary itself.

The facts are that there is arguably and probably a tinkering by higher ups or the powers-that-be in the dispensation of justice in certain cases which is why the delicate balance on which justice hinges has seemingly been compromised for a number of reasons.

Discrepancies and errors in the dispensation of justice

While the majority of cases appearing before Malaysian magistrates and judges are given due regard and disposed off satisfactorily, it is in a number of high profile cases where Malaysians perceive that there is a travesty of justice.

The perception by ordinary but right thinking Malaysians is that there is the element or factor of undue influence suffered by people seeking justice and this is where justice dispensed in the country sometimes is viewed with clear and obvious doubts and suspicions.

But can you blame a better informed and better educated Malaysian citizenry from expressing the perception that there is this unfairness, and hence, this intervention in a number of cases involving notable politicians and businesspeople.

The ordinary Malaysian, though not not legally well versed, by the mere application of common sense and right thinking in following the publicity of a number of cases have often drawn conclusions that there is amiss the dispensation of justice.

The allegations of the judiciary not being independent

In the performance and dispensation of justice by the judiciary over recent years, there have emerged allegations, rumours and speculation that not only the judiciary but law enforcement agencies suffer from outside interference by those with sweeping powers.

While these allegations have not been confirmed as true, there are Malaysians, especially practising lawyers who contend that there can be no smoke without fire but who is to actually determine the truth?

Analysts and commentators state that there are difficulties, hurdles and challenges in stating that the judiciary and law enforcement agencies are riddled by corruption as there is no factual proof that the dispensation of justice in this country is compromised.

But there are Malaysians who point out that the alleged corruption in the judiciary and within the law enforcement agencies in the country is the tip of the iceberg. But this is just to stir a hornet’s nest or open Pandora’s box.

This is why sleeping dogs are just let to lie down

If there is to be a concerted effort to get to the bottom of clearing the judiciary and law enforcement agencies of all alleged wrongdoing, misdeeds and misbehaviour an overhaul of these public offices has to be comprehensively undertaken.

This is just a terribly arduous task and might not be necessary unless the cry for true justice by Malaysians reach critical levels and instead there must be individual investigations opened into transgressions by the judiciary and law enforcement officials.

While it might not be possible to have a judiciary and law enforcement agencies to be completely free of corruption and completely free of interference and intervention, Malaysia must nevertheless strive in this direction.

The message by Malaysians seeking reforms and changes is very clear and top of the list by them is for the judiciary and law enforcement agencies to dispense quick, fair and just dispensation of justice in this country.

THE MALAYSIA VOICE

** The views expressed on this opinion is of the writer and not the publisher