Proposal for Malaysian lawyers to adopt and implement business and human rights principles
Edmund Bon and Jacqueline Albert
March 15, 2023
We hope all lawyers will support the motion on business and human rights.
We hope all lawyers will support the motion on business and human rights.
Malaysiakini | A businessperson charged over an allegedly offensive Facebook posting was granted a DNAA by the KL Session Court. Counsel Rajsurian Pillai and Jacqueline Hannah Albert had raised a preliminary objection against the charge, framed under section 233 of the CMA 1998, and the judge ruled that the charge was defective.
Free Malaysia Today | Padang Serai election candidate Azman Nasrudin’s likened the unity government to a promiscuous relationship, but lawyers Fahri Azzat and Jacqueline Albert believed he did not commit a crime. Jacqueline acknowledged that Azman’s remarks may be unpleasant but his actions were lawful as he did not threaten national security or incite violence or hate.
Malay Mail | The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals by NGOs and others to refer constitutional questions on the validity of an Emergency proclamation to the Federal Court. Lawyers Edmund Bon Tai Soon, New Sin Yew, and Jacqueline Hannah Albert represented Bersih and the NGOs.
The Edge Markets | Lawyers Edmund Bon Tai Soon, Jacqueline Albert, and New Sin Yew represented Bersih 2.0 and other NGOs which were appealing against the High Court decision not to refer constitutional questions posed under section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act to the Federal Court.
Edward Saw moved Jacqueline’s call to the Bar.
These proposed amendments to the ATIPSOM should be seriously considered if the government is committed to transforming the human rights protection landscape for victims and survivors of trafficking, smuggling, and forced labour in our country.
Action to prevent or avert serious harm to the environment should be taken now and immediately.
The Malaysian National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights cannot fall below what we already have, but must aspire to fulfil what we ought to have.
Is the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking constitutional?
We hope all lawyers will support the motion on business and human rights.
Malaysiakini | A businessperson charged over an allegedly offensive Facebook posting was granted a DNAA by the KL Session Court. Counsel Rajsurian Pillai and Jacqueline Hannah Albert had raised a preliminary objection against the charge, framed under section 233 of the CMA 1998, and the judge ruled that the charge was defective.
Free Malaysia Today | Padang Serai election candidate Azman Nasrudin’s likened the unity government to a promiscuous relationship, but lawyers Fahri Azzat and Jacqueline Albert believed he did not commit a crime. Jacqueline acknowledged that Azman’s remarks may be unpleasant but his actions were lawful as he did not threaten national security or incite violence or hate.
Malay Mail | The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals by NGOs and others to refer constitutional questions on the validity of an Emergency proclamation to the Federal Court. Lawyers Edmund Bon Tai Soon, New Sin Yew, and Jacqueline Hannah Albert represented Bersih and the NGOs.
The Edge Markets | Lawyers Edmund Bon Tai Soon, Jacqueline Albert, and New Sin Yew represented Bersih 2.0 and other NGOs which were appealing against the High Court decision not to refer constitutional questions posed under section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act to the Federal Court.
Edward Saw moved Jacqueline’s call to the Bar.
These proposed amendments to the ATIPSOM should be seriously considered if the government is committed to transforming the human rights protection landscape for victims and survivors of trafficking, smuggling, and forced labour in our country.
Action to prevent or avert serious harm to the environment should be taken now and immediately.
The Malaysian National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights cannot fall below what we already have, but must aspire to fulfil what we ought to have.
Is the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking constitutional?