MMU
Internal Law Moot Competition 2014/2015
Malaysian Language
Clarification Requests to the Moot Problem
**Note: If the response
is “No response
necessary,” this does not mean that it is not a good question. It merely means that you will have to prepare your submissions without the
information and generally means that I do not think the information is material to the
questions posed.
1. Apakah yang dimaksudkan dengan "melakukan sebarang kesalahan"? Adakah ia dirujuk kepada perbuatan memunggut
kutipan duit oleh pelajar atau menghadiri
persidangan Sosialis di Chicago atau kedua-duanya?
What do you mean by “committing
any
offence”? Is it referred to students’ action of collecting donation or attending
the Socialism conference
in Chicago or both?
You must determine this.
2. Apakah prosedur
atau tatatertib
membuang pelajar di Universiti Highland?
Adakah ia selaras dengan Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti 1971?
What is the procedure to expel students from Highland University? Is it consistent with UUCA?
The procedure used in this case was consistent with the internal University procedures. You
must
determine the answer to the second question.
1. Fakta mengatakan bahawa Encik Lee dan Cik Wong
bercadang untuk membuat
rayuan tentang keputusan Naib Canselor kepada Lembaga Pengarah. Tetapi, fakta
tidak mengatakan bahawa mereka membuat
rayuan tersebut pada hari yang ke
berapa selepas menerima surat di buang universiti.
When did Mr. Lee and Ms. Wong appeal to the university after receiving the
expulsion letter?
This question is answered in the English clarifications.
1. Sejak bila HUPPS diiktiraf dan diluluskan oleh pihak universiti?
When did HUPPS been approved and recognized by the university?
No response necessary.
2. Apakah releven persidangan itu pada masyarakat?
What is the relevancy of the conference to society?
You must determine this.
3. Berapa banyak dana yang mereka mohon daripada STAD?
How much is the amount of
fund that they applied from STAD?
The full amount.
4. Kenapa pembiayaan
itu dinafikan sedangkan
pembiayaan lain
tidak
pernah
dinafikan?
Why this funding application been denied by the university as other funding is not denied?
No reason was given.
5.
Adakah Bruce Lee dan Anna
Wong mempunyai apa-apa kuasa yang
membenarkan mereka untuk meminta pembiayaan dari pintu ke pintu?
Did they get any authority to collect
money from door-to door?
No.
6. Apakah kewarganegaraan Bruce Lee dan Anna Wong?
What are their nationalities?
Malaysian.
7. Apakah bukti yang menunjukkan aduan yang dibuat oleh Vera Wang ?
Is there any evidence to confirm that there was a complaint made by Vera
Wang?
You can assume that
the
facts are true.
8.
Apakah yang dimaksudkan oleh Naib Canselor Chao apabila beliau mengatakan beliau tidak pernah suka idea tersebut?
What is the intention of Vice Chansellor Chao when she mentions “I never
did
like the idea”?
You must interpret this.
9. Apakah tindakan
yang akan dikenakan?
What is the action imposed to?
This question is unclear. Malaysian lecturers have confirmed. Clarification was requested from student but none given.
10. Apakah peraturan universiti kerana
mereka tidak menyebut AUKU
atau
pengumpulan dana pelajar?
What is the University’s rule as it does not mention the UUCA nor do they
mention student fundraising?
You must draft your submissions without knowing all the University Rules. You must work with the ones given.
11. Apakah kesalahan
yang mereka telah lakukan?
What offence been committed by them?
You must determine this.
12. Apakah sebab untuk pihak universiti menafikan rayuan untuk didengar?
What are the
reasons given by the university when denying their appeal from
being heard?
No reason was given. It was not the University. It was the Board of
Directors.
13.
Apakah prosedur
oleh
pihak
universiti untuk
membuang pelajar
universiti
tersebut?
What are the procedures of
expelling students from the university?
The procedures in this case complied with the internal University Rules.
14. Adakah prosedur tersebut tertulis di dalam undang undang pihak universiti?
Did the procedures been written in the university’s rules?
Yes.
15. Adakah mereka mengikut prosedur tersebut?
Did they follow the procedures?
Yes.
16.
Mengikut fakta kes, permohonan yang dihantar oleh Encik Lee dan Cik Wong kepada Bahagian Hal Ehwal Pelajar telah ditolak dimana notis
penolakan menyatakan, “ Pembiayaan tidak diluluskan.”
Adakah sebarang alasan diberikan oleh pihak tersebut mengenai sebab atau alasan mengapa
pembiayaan itu tidak diluluskan?
As per the facts, the application of funding
was sent to the STAD
but
it was later denied. The denial notice stated “No funding
permitted.” Did the
university give any reasons for this (the denial/ rejection)?
No.
17.
Kenapa hanya mereka,
Bruce Lee dan
Anna Wong yang menjadi ahli kelab
tersebut?
Why only two of
them were the members of the Club?
Because there were only two.
18. Adakah kerana club tersebut tidak memberi apa-apa kebaikan kepada pelajar ?
Is it because the Club did not give any benefit to students?
You should interpret whether this is true based on the facts.
19.
Berdasarkan fakta yang mengatakan bahawa Naib Canselor perlu ke mesyuarat
dalam masa 5 minit, adakah masa yang diberikan kepada
mereka berdua
hanyalah sekejap sahaja ?
The facts did mention that the Vice Chacellor needs to attend meeting within
5 minutes,
does this means that the time given to them is just for a while/ not long?
You should interpret the time from the facts given.
20.
Perlukah Lembaga Pengarah memberikan alasan mengapa
beliau
tidak
mahu
mendegar rayuan mereka ?
Did the Board of Directors need to give reasons as to why they refused to hear the appeal?
They did not give reasons. The University complied with its own University Rules with
respect to the procedure undertaken in this case.
21.
Apakah maksud " dengan
melakukan sebarang kesalahan ". Adakah
ia merupakan satu kesalahan yang amat besar sehingga mereka perlu dibuang universiti ?
What is the meaning of “committing any offence”? Did this mean they have done serious offence that lead to expulsion from the university?
You must determine this.
22. Bagaimana universiti tersebut membenarkan persatuan tersebut apabila university
berkenaan mengetahui tentang
penglibatan persatuan tersebut dalam isu – isu politik ?
Why the university did
approved and
recognised the club when
the
university have knowledge that the club involvement in
politics?
No response necessary.
23.
Mengapa universiti tersebut tidak menghulurkan bantuan wang kepada persatuan
tersebut apabila universiti tersebut membenarkan pembukaan persatuan tersebut ? Why the university denied allocation of funds to the club when the university
approved the club to be operated in the university?
No response necessary.
24.
Tiada sebarang kenyataan yang diberikan tentang status “melakukan sebarang kesalahan”. Penjelasan secara mendalam diperlukan ?
No further explanation/ statement relation to the status of “committing any offence” Detail explanation is needed?
The University Rules do not give any detailed explanation.
25.
Naib Cancelor tidak memberikan sebarang penjelasan mengenai pembuangan pelajar berkenaan ?
The Vice Chancellor did not give explanation on why the students were been
expelled?
Refer to the facts.
26.
Bahagian Hal Ehwal Pelajar tidak memberikan sebarang penjelasan mengenai penolakan permohonan yang dilakukan pelajar- pelajar tersebut ?
No explanation given by STAD relating to the denial of application of fund allocation?
No.
27. Berapa lama masa yang diberikan oleh Naib Canselor kepada pelajar – pelajar
berkenaan untuk menjelaskan situasi mereka?
How long was the time given by the Vice Chancellor to the students to explain their situations?
You must infer from the facts.
28. Adakah Semakan Kehakiman kes ini dikemukakan ke Mahkamah Tinggi Shah
Alam? Jika tidak, Mahkamah Tinggi manakah yang kes ini
dikemukakan?
Did the judicial review application been filed in Shah Alam High Court? If
no,
in which High Court did the application been filed?
Yes, Shah Alam.
29.
Adakah Sosialisme 2014 merupakan persidangan yang berkaitan dengan politik atau persidangan tersebut hanya berkaitan dengan perbincangan akademik?
Did the Socialism conference 2014 related to political or academic
discussions?
You must determine this.
30. Berapakah umur pemohon-pemohon dalam kes ini?
How old is the applicant in
this case?
This question is answered in the English clarifications.
31.
Fakta mengatakan bahawa Encik Lee dan Cik Wong bercadang untuk membuat rayuan tentang keputusan Naib Canselor kepada Lembaga Pengarah. Tetapi, fakta tidak mengatakan bahawa mereka membuat rayuan tersebut pada hari yang ke berapa selepas menerima surat di buang universiti.
When did they appeal to the university after receiving the expulsion letter?
This question is answered in the English clarifications.
32. "Dalam
fakta
mut hanya mengatakan
bahawa Bruce Lee dan
Anna
Wong melanggar 15A dalam UUCA, namun demikian fakta tidak menyatakan adakah mereka didakwa oleh pendakwa raya dan disabitkan kesalahan oleh Mahkamah? " “ The facts did mention
that Mr. Lee and Ms. Wong violated Section 15A of the UUCA,
however the facts is silent on whether they been charged by the
prosecution and been convicted by the Court?”
They have not been charged or convicted.
33.
Dalam persoalan
pertama soalan
mut,
persoalannya ialah samaada keputusan
universiti untuk
membuang
permohon-pemohon adalah tidak sah
atas alasan alasan ketidakpatuhan prosedur...
In the first moot problem, the question
is whether the decision by the University to expel the applicants was invalid on the grounds of procedural impropriety …
34.
Soalan kami ialah, prosedur
yang disebutkan dalam persoalan
pertama soalan mut
merujukkan kepada apa prosedur?
The procedure in
the first moot question is referred to what procedures?
I assume the previous two questions are connected. You must determine this.
35.
Adakah sememangnya
mereka
berdua
sahaja
ahli persatuan sains politik kemasyarakatan
Universiti Highland? Adakah tiada ahli lain
selain
mereka berdua?
Is it only two of them are the members of the Club? Are there any other
members in
the club?
Please refer to the facts.
36. Bolehkah meletakkan petikan kes Bahasa Inggeris di dalam memorial Bahasa
Malaysia?
Can we place the English moot problem in the B.M. moot memorial?
You should place the BM Moot Problem in the BM memorial.
37. Dalam kes ini ada menyatakan, “…mereka telah dibuang dari university kerana
melanggar S 15 A (1) Akta Universiti-universiti dan Akta Universiti dan Kolej
Universiti 1971”. Persoalannya adakah Seksyen tersebut merujuk kepada Akta
Universiti-universiti atau pun Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti (AUKU)?
Moot problem did mention that “ … they being expelled from the University for violating Section 15A(1) of the Universities and University Colleges Act
1971 (UUCA).” The question is whether that section referred to Universities
Act or University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA)?
Yes.
38. Apa jenis “Citation”
yang digunakan untuk memorial.
What is the ‘citation’ used for the memorial.
You should use the format adopted by FOL: OSCOLA.
39. Adakah versi Akta Universiti – Universiti dan Akta Universiti dan Kolej
1971 (“UUCA”) ini
boleh dirujuk. Saya menganggap versi Akta ini versi terbaru.
Can we refer to the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA). I assume the version of the Act is the new version?
Use the applicable law as if this were a real case.
40. The second clarification is that since the malay moot question stated that the Lembaga Pengarah University
"boleh, tidak semestinya, memilih " untuk
mendengar rayuan ... , does it mean that the Lembaga Pengarah sometimes have the right to choose and sometimes do not have the right to choose to hear .. and if it is not in their discretionary
power
to choose, then whether this case is the type that they have the right to choose
to hear or
do not have the right to choose to hear which it must be heard by the Lembaga Pengarah.
The second clarification is that since the malay moot question stated that the The Board may, but need not, choose to hear the appeal ...,
does
it
mean that the Lembaga Pengarah sometimes have the right to choose and sometimes do not have the right to choose to hear .. and if it is not in their discretionary
power to choose,
then whether this case is the type that
they have the right to choose to hear or do not have the right to choose
to
hear which it must be heard by the Lembaga Pengarah.
This means that the Board can hear
the appeal if it wants. If it does not want, it does not have to hear the appeal.
41. From the BM version of mooting
question, it is stated
Akta Universiti-Universiti
dan
Akta Universiti dan Kolej 1971
(UUCA). However, the statute that i found is named as Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti 1971 (AUKU). So, which name
should i use in my submission? Is the one in the mooting question wrong?
From the B.M. version of mooting
question, it is stated that Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA).
However, the statute that I found is named
as Akta Universiti dan Kolej
Universiti 1971 (AUKU). So which name should I use in
my
submission? Is the one in mooting question wrong?
Please use AUKU instead of UUCA
No comments:
Post a Comment