'Ultimately, the test of possible or likelihood of prejudice has to have reference to the professional judge who will be hearing the case, not a collection of layman jurors - a system which has ceased to exist in our system of civil litigation' - YA Mohamad Ariff Yusof J, in the case of Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Sdn Bhd V. Fadha Nur Ahmad Kamar & Anor 6 CLJ 93
"...I entirely agree that discussion, however strongly expressed, on matter of general public interest of this kind is not to be stifled merely because there is litigation pending arising out of the particular facts to which general principles discussed would be applicable. If the arousing of public opinion by this kind of discussion has the indirect effect of bringing pressure to bear on a particular litigant to abandon or settle a pending action, this must be borne because of the greater public interest in upholding freedom of discussion on matters of general public concern...."
A SUSPECT HAS A RIGHT TO SILENCE - BUT NOT PRIME MINISTER OR GOVERNMENT
SUBJUDICE - NOT APPLY TO CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS, PAC HEARINGS..?
Subjudice, certainly does not apply by reason that the PAC is deliberating this matter. PAC is a Parliamentary Committee composed of MPs. Of course, the independence of the PAC, is in question since the majority is still BN MPs? We hope that they will act independently irrespective of party affiliations.