2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia
| Format: | General Document |
|---|
| _version_ | 1860798168192516096 |
|---|---|
| building | INTELEK Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| collectionurl | https://intelek.unisza.edu.my/intelek/pages/search.php?search=!collection3 |
| copyright | Copyright©PWB2025 |
| country | Malaysia |
| date | 2019-09-15 |
| format | General Document |
| id | 16268 |
| institution | UniSZA |
| originalfilename | THE RIGHT TO AN ORAL HEARING IN DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PUBLIC SERVANTS IN MALAYSIA (MASTER_2019).pdf |
| person | Zukiferee bin Ibrahim |
| recordtype | oai_dc |
| resourceurl | https://intelek.unisza.edu.my/intelek/pages/view.php?ref=16268 |
| sourcemedia | Server storage Scanned document |
| spelling | 16268 https://intelek.unisza.edu.my/intelek/pages/view.php?ref=16268 https://intelek.unisza.edu.my/intelek/pages/search.php?search=!collection3 General Document Malaysia Library Staff (Top Management) Library Staff (Management) Library Staff (Support) Terengganu Faculty of Law & International Relations English application/pdf 1.5 Server storage Scanned document UniSZA Private Access Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin SAMBox 2.3.4; modified using iTextSharp™ 5.5.10 ©2000-2016 iText Group NV (AGPL-version) Copyright©PWB2025 2019-09-15 327 THE RIGHT TO AN ORAL HEARING IN DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PUBLIC SERVANTS IN MALAYSIA (MASTER_2019).pdf Zukiferee bin Ibrahim Oral Hearing Disciplinary Public service Disciplinary action Administrative procedure 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia The decisions of disciplinary authorities in disciplinary proceedings continue to be challenged in the courts on the authorities’ failure to grant the right to oral hearings to the affected public servants albeit the principle of “a reasonable opportunity of being heard” under Article 135(2) of the Federal Constitution was already upheld by the Privy Council in Najar Singh’s case since 1976. Such failure hindered the deliverance of justice and may affect the reputation and goodwill of the Malaysian government as the largest employer in the country. This study aimed to examine the constitutional and legislative provisions on the right to an oral hearing in disciplinary proceedings against public servants; the court’s approach in dealing with this right; and the position of the laws of the United Kingdom and India in relation to this right. The research methodology in this study is based on doctrinal method whereby data were collected from both primary and secondary sources which include the provisions of the Federal Constitution, Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1993, other Malaysian laws, decided cases from Malaysia, the United Kingdom and India, books, and journal articles. These data were then analysed using the content analysis method. This study revealed three significant findings. Firstly, the interpretation of the constitutional term “a reasonable opportunity of being heard” was vague. Secondly, the approach adopted by the Federal Court was found to be inconsistent; sometimes the court adopted a liberal approach while at other times, a restricted one. Thirdly, the position of the public servants in the United Kingdom and India was better protected than that of the public servants in Malaysia regarding their right to an oral hearing. Therefore, the constitutional protection of “a reasonable opportunity of being heard” under Article 135(2) in the case of dismissal and reduction in rank of a public servant in Malaysia should be interpreted in the light of the fundamental liberties as enshrined in the Article 5 and Article 8 of the Federal Constitution. In other words, it is proposed that the oral hearing should be expressly regulated in disciplinary proceedings against public servants in Malaysia. Dissertations, Academic Thesis |
| spellingShingle | 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia |
| state | Terengganu |
| subject | Public service Disciplinary action Administrative procedure Dissertations, Academic |
| summary | The decisions of disciplinary authorities in disciplinary proceedings continue to be challenged in the courts on the authorities’ failure to grant the right to oral hearings to the affected public servants albeit the principle of “a reasonable opportunity of being heard” under Article 135(2) of the Federal Constitution was already upheld by the Privy Council in Najar Singh’s case since 1976. Such failure hindered the deliverance of justice and may affect the reputation and goodwill of the Malaysian government as the largest employer in the country. This study aimed to examine the constitutional and legislative provisions on the right to an oral hearing in disciplinary proceedings against public servants; the court’s approach in dealing with this right; and the position of the laws of the United Kingdom and India in relation to this right. The research methodology in this study is based on doctrinal method whereby data were collected from both primary and secondary sources which include the provisions of the Federal Constitution, Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1993, other Malaysian laws, decided cases from Malaysia, the United Kingdom and India, books, and journal articles. These data were then analysed using the content analysis method. This study revealed three significant findings. Firstly, the interpretation of the constitutional term “a reasonable opportunity of being heard” was vague. Secondly, the approach adopted by the Federal Court was found to be inconsistent; sometimes the court adopted a liberal approach while at other times, a restricted one. Thirdly, the position of the public servants in the United Kingdom and India was better protected than that of the public servants in Malaysia regarding their right to an oral hearing. Therefore, the constitutional protection of “a reasonable opportunity of being heard” under Article 135(2) in the case of dismissal and reduction in rank of a public servant in Malaysia should be interpreted in the light of the fundamental liberties as enshrined in the Article 5 and Article 8 of the Federal Constitution. In other words, it is proposed that the oral hearing should be expressly regulated in disciplinary proceedings against public servants in Malaysia. |
| title | 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia |
| title_full | 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia |
| title_fullStr | 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia |
| title_full_unstemmed | 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia |
| title_short | 2019_The Right to an Oral Hearing in Disciplinary Proceedings Against Public Servants in Malaysia |
| title_sort | 2019_the right to an oral hearing in disciplinary proceedings against public servants in malaysia |