Friday, 22 August 2025 07:00AM MYT
Lawyers Divided Over Push for Livestreaming Corruption Trials
Two lawyers express conflicting views on the MACC’s proposal to livestream corruption trials for transparency. (File pic)
Untuk berita terkini Sinar Harian, ikuti di Telegram dan TikTok kami
KUALA LUMPUR: Two lawyers have conflicting views on the suggestion by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission that corruption trials be livestreamed.
Senior lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has expressed support for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s proposal to livestream corruption trials.
Shafee who represents former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said his client had pushed for his trial to be broadcast live since the day he was charged over funds linked to SRC International Sdn Bhd.
“I support this idea to stream live. But when we asked for it, the (MACC) prosecutors objected,” he told the New Straits Times.
He said this when asked to comment on MACC Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki’s statement that the anti-graft body was mooting livestreaming of graft trials to boost transparency.
Azam had said the proposal was among reforms discussed to ensure public confidence, amid concerns that court proceedings were sometimes misrepresented on social media.
In March 2019, just days before his trial was due to start, the Najib had said he supports the idea of a ‘live’ broadcast of his trial as he believed it would aid in transparency and ensure the rule of law, while also asserting the public’s right to know the truth.
However, on April 1, the same year, the corporate communications unit of the Chief Registrar’s Office of the Federal Court had issued a statement making clear that court proceedings could not be broadcast live or recorded by any media.
An online petition initiated in 2018 calling for Najib’s trial to be broadcast live has so far gathered 34,901 signatures, just shy of its 35,000 target.
Lawyer Datuk Geethan Ram Vincent, however, opposed the proposal, saying broadcasting trials in real time often turns them into public spectacles.
He said such broadcasts would invite unnecessary commentary, sensational reporting and endless debates on social media, which in turn could place additional pressure on judges and lawyers.
“Live streaming can also change how people behave inside the courtroom.
“Lawyers or witnesses might feel tempted to play to the gallery rather than focus on the case itself, and this lowers the dignity of judicial proceedings,” he said.
Geethan said witnesses may not speak as openly if they knew their words were being broadcast nationwide, as the fear of being targeted, misrepresented or shamed could affect the quality of evidence.
“In my view, transparency is not lacking. Court judgments are already published for everyone to read, and the press covers these cases with explanations,” he said.