YOURSAY | ‘Accused can’t be faulted, would clutch at straws for survival.’

Jana Wibawa: Muhyiddin files for DNAA in 3 money laundering charges

Zahid's DNAA: Rights group calls for live broadcast of PSSC hearing

Vijay47: Following the quality of mercy that droppeth as the gentle rain upon the place beneath and drenched Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, he of great good fortune, it appears that we are suddenly facing a deluge of pleas for respite through DNAAs (dismissal not amounting to acquittal), DAAs (dismissal amounting to acquittal), and a host of other dubious acronyms.

It is almost as if the cessation of trial is an inevitable consequence to the laying of charges; like the rainbow appearing after a shower. That is, until such displays of heavenly colour were banned.

The accused certainly cannot be faulted, like the drowning man, he would clutch at any passing straw in the hope of survival. No, the real culprits of the piece are the Attorney General’s Chambers and all who harbour within.

We were once haughtily informed that the prosecution does not sally forth to joust unless victory was 99 percent secure in its firm grip. Yet cases continue falling like nine pins with nary a protest to any application from the defence.

What is truly frightening is that many of the cases dismissed are not due to the brilliance of the accused’s team but the sheer incompetence and ill-preparedness of the prosecution.

This occurs with such frequency that we wonder whether these oversights are deliberate and not congenital failings, which of course, opens cans of succulent worms. Big notes and small envelopes come to mind.

Wherefore art they, the attorney generals of years gone by. Evidently, when the going gets tough, they flee the scene, they retire to safe havens, tails smugly glued between legs.

But fret not, the prosecution awakens to fight again - an appeal has been lodged! Yeah, sure. We have heard that one before. Many times.

Anon 93751028: How many of these people are trotting around claiming their innocence because of this DNAA/DAA nonsense?

Other countries (witness former US president Donald Trump's ongoing court cases) seem to block several days or weeks for the hearing of charges, so the whole process is carried out speedily.

Here we have two days here, a couple more there and constant delays, often because of pathetic reasons.

This allows time for “negotiations” such as this. Let them be found guilty or innocent via the court system, I think the public is heartily sick of this.

Get on with fixing the mess in the country, not saving your own skins claiming you did not steal anything.

Koel: When a country closes an eye to corruption in the highest office in the land, it becomes a colluding party to corruption throughout the land. People who hold the highest office is a representative of the country.

Any whiff of corruption charges against such a person is an accusation that the country is corrupt from top to bottom. Pardoning such heinous betrayers of the country and acquitting them or even discharging them is also a betrayal of the country.

All charges must be strenuously investigated. If the charges stand the individual must face the courts and prove he or she is not guilty. If other Asian countries can do this, why can’t Malaysia? Unless we are all willing to close an eye because we are all guilty.

Apa pun boleh: Much ado about nothing - a comedy by William “Shakespeare” Leong is being played out in the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on Human Rights, Elections and Institutional Reform (PSSC). The DNAA granted to Zahid is to a point sub judice as he can be charged and prosecuted for the same offences again.

Leong is a PKR/Pakatan Harapan MP and believed to be a member of the inner circle. The AG is protected by law in the decisions he takes to prosecute or not to prosecute. In fact, he is merely “invited” by the PPSC, not summoned.

Most involved are people who served or are serving the Madani government. Unlike the many previous DNAA cases, Zahid's became controversial because he is the kingpin for the survival of the Madani government. Accordingly, nothing much is expected from this routine.

In fact, the demand by Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) for live broadcast is likely to have the opposite effect as those involved including the AGs, if they turn up, are likely to take a cautious approach. They will be circumspect to protect their own bread and butter.

At the end of the day, both Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and the AGC have given their explanation. The AG that pulled out the case is likely to spin the same “11 cogent reasons” for what he did.

Even if it is broadcast live not much in the way of revelation or exposure is expected and not many are expected to view it.

We have to take these charades (passing the buck exercises) by the ruling elites with a pinch of salt. Is the PSSC as noble as what it is made out to be? Remember the chairperson who did not bat an eyelid in sheepishly conceding his deed?

Man on Silver Mountain: The big practical question here is what purpose does it serve by broadcasting the proceedings live? To satisfy some curiosity?

Perhaps. Otherwise, Madpet's request is counter-productive, vexatious, and therefore self-serving, obviously to get some attention. Can’t see how they get this, short of changing Parliamentary procedure.

The court case is already open to all. You have all the information you want under the law. There is no secret, it is an open court. However, there may be things that need to be done closed door, for a purpose or simply not appropriate for public discussion.

Besides, these MPs are politicians. They are actors. Publicity does not scare them. They just make use of it for exposure.

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. In the past year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.