Chief Justice James Thomson started off with thanking the lawyers for their assistance and then effectively apologising for not having the time to discuss their arguments in-depth. Manners maketh the man, as they say. Furthermore, as the second paragraph shows, it wasn’t just the Judge who behaved in a polite manner. The lawyers too were commended for their civility towards one another and how they practised restraint despite being on diametrically opposed camps dealing with a passionate subject matter.This opening statement by the Judge and his description of the behaviour of the lawyers just reeks of class. It is that intangible quality that raises one above the crude and the crass.
Abu Talib,13 years of sheer apathy the determining fact is that everyone, apart from the victim, has a vested interest in silence since the guilt, active or passive, extends beyond the obviously culpable. Governments might inspire
bowing to political masters”
is all an eyewash
Mohamad Apandi Ali, a former United Malays National Organization state treasurer before being elevated to public prosecutor and then the judicial bench, was hurriedly drafted to replace the long-serving Abdul Gani Patail in August just as Gani Patail reportedly was about to file charges against Najib for corruption. Apandi immediately denied that Kevin Morais was working on the case when he was abducted and murdered.The Attorney-General office,For months, Malaysian law enforcement has been wracked with attempts on the part of the Najib government to quell investigations into hundreds of millions of dollars that ended up in the prime minister’s personal account, then disappeared again, and by massive mismanagement of the troubled 1Malaysia Development Bhd. state-backed investment firm Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission officials have been subjected to what has been called a scorched-earth campaign to discover who, if any of them, has been leaking information on the case. ‘Damage has already been done to his almost non-existent reputation.’read this Needed, intelligent Attorney-General not a first-rate hypocrite
A strong, strident debate has started around a set of consumer rights issues, like freedom of expression , quality of service, net neutrality, privacy and so on. A debate that is evolving slowly and surely into a Magna Carta for net and telecom consumers that enshrines the right to quality service, free and fair competition amongst others.
The real danger to a free, fair and open internet is the growing power of telecom companies to ‘cannibalise’ the internet. Net neutrality is ultimately about preventing telcos from misusing their power over the internet. Their desire to differentially ‘rate’ different parts of the net transforms access providers into gatekeepers – thus cannibalising the internet.Telcos want to use data pricing or network management to preferentially provide access to parts of the internet. This creates artificial islands on the net – which in turn, slowly but surely and irreversibly, concentrates commercial power among a few telcos. This is what User call ‘cannibalisation’ of the internet.Once developed, it is almost impossible to reverse given the finite competition and insuperable entry barriers to it. That is precisely the situation we want to avoid vis-à-vis the internet, where telcos start influencing users and steering them onto parts of the internet where they gain more.