Accept Briefs Only If You Are Ready Judge Advises Lawyers

---

 
The Shah Alam High Court dismissed a criminal appeal after ruling the case could be decided without hearing submissions from counsel.
PETALING JAYA: A judge has reminded lawyers not to accept cases if they are unable to appear in court or are not ready for trial.
Justice Aslam Zainuddin said lawyers should always keep in mind rules 6 and 24 of the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 which governs the conduct of their practice.
The judge made the remark when dismissing an appeal by Joseph Onod and Chan Wan Chuan who were convicted by a magistrate under the Customs Act 1967 for bringing contraband beer into the country.
Aslam said he had postponed the appeal hearing three times last year as their counsel did not file his submissions.
He said even the prosecution, the respondent in the appeal, did not file submissions for the court to consider.
Aslam said although the lawyer appearing on the day of the hearing stated that he was merely mentioning the case on behalf of the appellants’ counsel, this did not absolve him from conducting the matter since he was an officer of the court.
The judge said if a lawyer was for whatever reason not prepared to conduct a matter, he should not appear in court.
Aslam described the conduct of the duo’s counsel as most unbecoming as he had sent a fellow lawyer to court “like a lamb to the slaughter”, unprepared to conduct the case which was fixed for hearing on that day.
“It is also very presumptuous of him to think that the court will adjourn the matter for the fourth time to another date just because he had not filed any submission,” he said in a written judgment released recently.
Onod and Chan have now gone to the Court of Appeal to set aside Aslam’s decision on grounds they did not get a fair trial as the decision was made without the presence of their preferred counsel and the customs’ deputy public prosecutor.
Aslam said he dismissed the appeal after carefully perusing the appeal records and the grounds of decision of the magistrate, holding the convictions to be safe.
“There is no impediment in law or criminal procedure which prevents a court from deciding on a matter without the benefit of submission by parties.
“Making a decision without counsel’s submission does not amount to denial of a fair trial. The court cannot be expected to wait endlessly, like waiting for Godot, until they do,” he added.
Aslam said that in 2010, the Federal Court had in the case of Diana Nelson Tanoja v Public Prosecutor ruled that, under Section 181(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, a trial judge could if he wanted to decide a case without hearing submissions from counsel.
That provision states that the lawyer examines his witnesses, if any, and after cross and re-examination, may sum up his case.
“The word ‘may’ indicates discretion,” he said, adding that although the ruling discussed a situation at the end of a criminal trial, that principle applied to the case before him. - FMT

---