The Federal Court on Tuesday (April 23) sentenced lawyer Arunachalam Kasi, better known as Arun Kasi, to 30 days’ jail and fined RM40,000 after finding him guilty of contempt of court over his two statements criticising the proceedings and decision of a court case.
Arun had previously stressed that his comments were fair criticism.
Justice Tan Sri Ramly Ali, who led a five-member panel, said the bench is unconvinced that Arun’s articles were written in public interest.
Ramly also held that Arun Kasi’s contemptuous statements against the Federal Court were very serious and tarnished the good name of the judiciary as a whole, undermined the public confidence in the judiciary, and ridiculed, scandalised and offended the dignity, integrity and impartiality of the court.
“We (the panel) have also considered the Bar’s submission not to impose a custodial sentence. However, the gravity of the offence committed by Arun Kasi, coupled with his refusal to tender an unreserved apology, justifies this court taking a serious view of the matter.
“In the circumstances, we are of the view that the appropriate sentence is a term of imprisonment of 30 days from today and a fine of RM40,000 in default 30 days’ jail,” said Ramly on Tuesday (April 23).
Arun, who also mitigated in addition to his lawyer Wilson Joy Appukuttan, said he had not intended to undermine the judiciary but only wanted reforms to be carried out in the Asian International Arbitration Centre Malaysia.
“I regret what I have done, but I don’t intend to apologise,” he said.
Attorney-General Tommy Thomas initiated the committal proceedings after he won the Federal Court’s leave on February 27 to cite Arun for contempt over two articles that were published online.
Thomas, in his submission for sentence, said he left it to the court but provided a list of cases in Malaysia and Singapore concerning the trend in punishment for contempt.
“As guardian of public interest and the rule of law, we have proved our case beyond reasonable doubt,” he said.
Last week, Arun’s father Kasi Arunachalam Chettiar, 78, penned an open letter to Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad stating that he would embark on a fast outside Parliament until justice prevailed.
He also urged for the release of the court transcript to establish if Thomas has followed the rule of law in the case.
Meanwhile, the Federal Court’s decision has drawn criticism from the legal community as lawyers and experts took to social media to express their dissatisfaction.
Former Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said the Malaysian Bar should organise a march to the Palace of Justice in a show of solidarity.
“Don’t let Arun suffer alone. This is the beginning of New Malaysia that we must oppose,” he tweeted.
Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) advisor N Surendran also tweeted on the matter and said a fine would have been sufficient in Arun’s case.
“Imprisonment for contempt should be imposed only in the most serious cases. More so, since there is no right of appeal from the sentence,” he said.
Malaysia’s representative to the Asean intergovernmental commission on human rights Eric Paulsen said the sentence was unnecessary and would not promote public confidence.
“Justice is not a cloistered virtue and everyone must be allowed to be critical, rightly, wrongly, even being rude or outspoken regarding the judiciary,” he added.
According to Paulsen, the offence of scandalising the judiciary is archaic and should be abolished.
“Respect for the judiciary cannot be enhanced through contempt proceedings, i.e. the courts themselves assessing whether allegations of impropriety against the judiciary are justified.
“What is at stake is freedom of speech. It is our right to speak out on matters of public interest and judges and their judgments should not be shielded from criticisms,” he tweeted.
Another lawyer Shanmuga K pointed out that no lawyer had been jailed for such an offence during the BN administration.
“Has a lawyer in ‘Malaysia lama’ (old Malaysia) ever been sent to prison for the archaic offence of ‘scandalising the judiciary’ because of a critique of a court judgment?
“‘Malaysia baru’ (new Malaysia) keeps letting me down,” he added in a Twitter posting, which was retweeted by LFL executive director Latheefa Koya.
Concurring with Paulsen, lawyer Syahredzan Johan tweeted that the custodial sentence of 30 days is unnecessary and excessive, adding that a fine would have been sufficient.