I was disappointed by the speech of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on “Delivering Justice, Renewing Trust” hosted by the Bar Council last night.
I had expected more, much more, than what was announced by Abdullah, viz:
• Ex-gratia payment for “the pain and loss” suffered by the late Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and their families, Tun Salleh Abas, Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh and Datuk George Seah in the 1988 Judicial Crisis. .
• A Judicial Appointments Commission;
• Review of the judiciary’s terms of service and remuneration to ensure that the Bench can attract and retain the very best of the nation’s talent.
The thunderous and prolonged applause which greeted Abdullah’s recognition of the “contributions of these six judges to the nation, their commitment towards upholding justice” and acknowledgement of “ the pain and loss they have endured” in the 1988 judicial crisis cannot hide the general disappointment that the Prime Minister had fallen far short of expectations to ensure a fair and just closure to the Mother of Judicial Crisis in 1988.
It is precisely because the “contributions, pain and loss” of the six wronged judges cannot be equated with mere currency that the ex gratia payment is grossly inadequate. The six wronged judges deserve a full and proper recompense.
Furthermore, the victims of the 1988 “Mother of Judiclal Crisis” and the series of one judicial crisis after another which rocked the nation for two decades were not just the six wronged judges, but the Malaysian people and nation for 20 years because of the ravages to the system of justice which became a laughing stock to Malaysians and the world.
The depredations to the system of justice in the past two decades, depriving Malaysia of a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law, cannot and should not be swept under the carpet with an ex gratia payment to the six wronged judges in 1988.
A Royal Commission of Inquiry – a Judicial “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission – into the 1988 “Mother of Judicial Crisis” and two decades of judicial darkness should be set up precisely as the victims of the ravages to the justice system were not just to six wronged judges but the Malaysian people and nation which cannot be computed in monetary terms.
The objective of such a Judicial “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission should not be punitive but to find out what went wrong to cause the country to be enveloped by two decades of judicial darkness – why the various national stakeholders, the judiciary, Parliament, mass media and civil society failed the test to defend the cardinal Constitutional principles of the doctrine of separation of powers and an independent, impartial and competent judiciary.
It is only with such a comprehensive investigation and serious soul-searching that we can ensure that another “judicial darkness” will not descend on Malaysia in future.
Abdullah’s initiatives announced last night however belated is most welcome
but they are only initial steps towards major national reforms which he had promised but failed to fulfill since becoming Prime Minister more than four years ago.
Has Abdullah the political will to implement bold reforms to institutions, laws, mindsets and system of governance in all areas of national life starting with a comprehensive package of national reforms when the new 12th Parliament convenes on April 28?
#1 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:34 am
PEOPLE & POLITICS
Wanted: Singapore’s fourth PM
http://www.straitstimes.com/Free/Story/STIStory_228485.html
Actually, Pak Lah and Najib should try applying. This way they can benchmark themselves with the best talent. Just wondering if they will be in the top 200 eligible candidates or not? Also wondering if S’pore can lower the bar on the key attributes. That would certainly help because we have ‘global citizens’ who are ecperienced in negotiating subterranean submarine deals too, mixed with subterfuge for good measure.
STI: “Key attributes”
“SOME fundamentals are set in stone. Any PAP candidate, says Dr Ng, will have to be ‘trustworthy, capable and caring’.
‘These are non-negotiable,’ he says. ‘If you don’t have these, you’re not on the slate.’
Another attribute critical for the next PM: He will need to be a ‘global citizen’.
Whether it is about inflation, the price of rice or free-trade agreements, Singapore is so ‘globally linked that its leaders need to be internationally exposed and globally aware’, says Dr Ng, who is the Minister for Education and Second Minister for Defence. ‘That will become increasingly important.’ “
#2 by gofortruth on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:57 am
Who caused such “pain & loss”? If such a ruthless person who brought so much harm to the judiciary system is still allowed to walk free, where is justice in the nation?
Throwing “sweets & candies” at the people just before election didn’t work this time and imagine throwing “candies” at the judiciary victims without giving full apology. It is an utter insult to the victims. They all deserved FULL compensation & the culprit should be charged.
Or all these are mere half hearted SHOW?
We want to see what happens to Lingam case then we will know what kind of “Judicial Appointment Commission” we will get.
#3 by limkamput on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:25 am
Yes, I think the announcement by AAB has fallen short. No matter how forgiving we may want to be, it is time to settle the score. Past leaders who committed wrong must be called to account. This is the only right thing to do and an unequivocal example we want to set for present and future leaders. If we allow past leaders who have committed wrong to walk freely and talk loudly, it will only encourage present and future leaders to do the same. I say let’s have a thorough investigation to find out who were culpable and be punished for it. For too long the ruling class have it too good. Let break the circle of them protecting each other.
#4 by voice on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:27 am
As I expected from this kind of PM
#5 by seage on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:30 am
Its like breaking a person’s legs, then compensate them 20 years later with a wheelchair.
#6 by Bigjoe on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:30 am
No doubt what the PM announced is far from what the public wanted but the biggest danger I feel of regression is the exact nature of the Judicial commission of Appt. The key missing word is ‘independent’ i.e., accountable to Parliament and not the executive. If the Judicial Commission ends up like the Royal Commission to verify ‘Lingam Tape’, we are not going to see any real progress.
In fact, we are not going to see any real progress anytime soon since its mostly about appointments. How often do judges get appointed? Granted the most immediate concern is the next CJ. If Zaki gets the job, the whole thing is a mockery. Not only must Zaki NOT get the job of CJ, he should be removed from the bench entirely..
Its clear they are avoiding punishing anyone for past wrongs. Cover up and move on is still the operative idea here.
#7 by Damocles on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:50 am
Uncle Lim, the one and only way that Malaysians can ever see the light at the end of the tunnel, is to boot the BN out completely from the government.
As long as they remain in power, we are all doomed.
#8 by PSM on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:54 am
Bro Kit,
I think most of us were not disappointed! Because we knew this is what to expect from Pak Lah & UMNO!
They only know how to use Money (UMNO mahhhh!).
Royal Commission? We have yet to see what the Lingam RC’s come up with. Is it a wonder they have been prolonging the findings?!
Pak Lah knows he has to “show” the Rakyat he is doing something, if not the calls to resign will just intensify!
So he tries to bribe them (Money Politics)! What an insult!
UMNO can’t afford to have Judicial Reform because they need “crooked’ judges to help them keep doing their “dirty deeds”!
#9 by seage on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:59 am
I think one of the best way to deal with these UMNOputras is to chop off both their hands (Hudud)and throw them into ISA detention indefinitely. Then release them after 20 odd years and organise a dinner and invite all of them (How are they gonna eat? :p) and make a speech like Bodowi. Ahhh~ smell that sweet smell of revenge!
#10 by merdeka on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 12:10 pm
YB Lim,
No apology only compensation…..totally not acceptable.
The 6 judges sacked should not attend the function !!!!!!
BAR Council which had waited & fought 2 decades for this day is merely a toothless tiger !!!!!!!!!
#11 by madmix on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 12:25 pm
Tun Salleh himself has been quoted as saying; Bernama) KUALA LUMPUR, April 18 — “I praise Allah for being merciful and kind to me… I’ve waited 20 years and my prayers have been answered.”
This was the immediate reaction of former lord president Tun Salleh Abas after the government decided to give ex-gratia payment to those who were sacked during the judiciary crisis in 1988.
So Y.B. Lim, I think we should give be satisfied with abdullah’s concessions. To expect him to do much more would be politically difficult and would harm his precarious position.
#12 by alefree on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 12:25 pm
Judges are to be elected and not appointed.they are to be elected with nominations and the appointment is to be accepted by the Parliment.
Malaysia needs more Judges .I am fed up with the long delays for Court cases for both criminal and civil suits.
#13 by bLOGGERHEAD on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 12:26 pm
Wow!Why suddenly our PM became so wise and sensible like a saint? Firstly he agreed to 5 of the 6 demands by Ceupacs and secondly he promised a judicial reforms. But I can assure you these would not have happened if not because of the 8th. March political tsunami. It must be the post tsunami shock-wave that had enlightened and waken him up to the “New Dawn”. Hey! Mr. PM, since you are in such a”do good” mood, how about abolishing the ISA and make Malaysia trully democratic and the world world would salute you.
#14 by wag-the-dog on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 12:53 pm
Under threat? What threat?
BRAVE NEW WORLD By AZMI SHAROM
Since the recent general election, voices have risen up in a shrill warning cry that the Malays are now ‘under threat’. But perhaps the real threat is the threat to Umno hegemony.
AND so it begins. Race-based rhetoric has raised its ugly little head in response to a democratic process. Over 49% of the people of Malaysia have voted for parties that have rejected race-based affirmative action in favour of a needs-based platform.
VIsit http://www.wagthedog-malaysia.blogspot.com for details
#15 by stevchew on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:04 pm
Although it is short of an apology, this is already a big slap to the face of TUN.
#16 by mendela on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:18 pm
The culprit Maha-thiu should be brought to court immediate. Maha-thiu should be put to jail.
We must not allow him to keep on barking on the street. He has done too much damage to Malaysia.
This guy is worse than Marcos, far worse than his good pal Mugabi!
#17 by wargamalaysia on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:34 pm
wag-the-dog Says:
Today at 12: 53.18 (30 minutes ago)
Under threat? What threat?
BRAVE NEW WORLD By AZMI SHAROM
Since the recent general election, voices have risen up in a shrill warning cry that the Malays are now ‘under threat’. But perhaps the real threat is the threat to Umno hegemony.
AND so it begins. Race-based rhetoric has raised its ugly little head in response to a democratic process. Over 49% of the people of Malaysia have voted for parties that have rejected race-based affirmative action in favour of a needs-based platform.
—————-
I am not trying to be sceptical here. I read 2 articles in malaysia today. One abaut “Malaysians ready for non-racial government”. The other about “Gerakan has 3 options/alternatives”.
The interesting part is, Gerakan said – 1. stay with BN. 2. Join PR 3. Be independant.
Then the reason for not joining PR is GERAKAN (assuming it adopts PR objectives) will never have any seat to contest as DAP will contests all in urban areas, PKR in semi-urban and PAS in rural areas. And Gerakan always contests in most urban areas.
I am wondering – why DAP in all urban areas, PKR in semi-urban and PAS in rural? What determines these? Definitely the composition of voters.
Do we malaysians really ready for non-racial governments? As in the earlier article?
#18 by billgates on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:45 pm
Looks like Paklah is taking revenge on Tun Dr M. While it is a good start, we hope the ISA used by TDM under Ops Lallang be revisited.
Time now to abolish ISA and released the Hindraf 5.
http://pakatanrakrat-perak.blogspot.com
#19 by HJ Angus on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:46 pm
Under his present situation where many colleagues are reluctant to start such reforms, I think he has pushed the envelope as far as he can go.
Of course when the PR takes control of the government it can revisit the problem and take stronger measures.
Sometimes when one reaches the peak of the mountain, the view is quite different.
Now we can press to get that Judicial Appt. Commission set up with 6 months as the latest target.
http://malaysiawatch3.blogspot.com/2008/04/setting-reasonable-time-frame-for.html
#20 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:49 pm
“If the Judicial Commission ends up like the Royal Commission to verify ‘Lingam Tape’, we are not going to see any real progress” – Big Joe.
This Judicial Commission, proposed by Pak Lah is a Judicial Appointments Commission – a Commission to select future judges appointment, which we hope will evince and display independence based on its composition – it is not the same kind of commission of enquiry, enquiring or investigating certain defined questions and issues as the Commission enquiring the Lingam Video clip.
#21 by yhsiew on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 1:55 pm
The monetary compensation is merely another ugly face of UMNO’s money politics – they think money can buy everything!
#22 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 2:16 pm
We should not push the PM against the wall as if he made no significant concessions in principle as regards judicial reform.
The argument here is that there is no apology. I disagree. Why is it that the most significant thing in an apology must be the explicit use of the word … apology???
It is substance not form, whether word “apology” is present.
What is an apology (by not just words but acts, substance and not form)?
There must be an exchange of shame and power between the offender (Pak Lah reprsenting government) and the offended (Judges aggrieved represented by Tun Salleh Abas). (Pak Lah invited all the aggrieved judges to sit with him in same table to honour them. It was an act of humility on Pak Lah’s part).
An effective apology will have 4 basic elements : (1) expression of regret or remorse whether or not the person uses word apology or even says he is not apologising; (2) acknowledgment of injury; (3) degree of accountability; and (4) measures to prevent future wrongdoing/harm.
I contend all 4 basic elements have been fulfilled in last nights events – only in case of (3) and (4), whether there is follow up and satisfactory implementation.
Tun Salleh Abas’s remarks quoted by Bernama April 18 (if accurate) — “I praise Allah for being merciful and kind to me… I’ve waited 20 years and my prayers have been answered” – says all and confirms the existence of the apology, even if it was specifically denied by the PM that he has given one.
The “sleepy head” you talk about is the smart one who has given the apology for the government without saying, and even in fact denying that he has given one – thus balancing the pressures from all sides. It is a class act.
#23 by gofortruth on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 2:17 pm
Come to think of it, they are using the rakyat’s money to settle BN’s arrogant abuse on the judiciary system. Boleh ka?
#24 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 2:33 pm
What so great about use of the word “apology” or “I apologise”??? Didn’t the two Barisan Nasional (BN) MPs, Datuk Mohd Said Yusuf (Jasin) and Datuk Bung Mohtar Radin (Kinabatangan) publicly apologise for sexist remarks of “bochor” in Parliament against Fong Po Kuan ??? And did YB Kit accept that their apology was genuine contrition based on surrounding circumstances as measurement for sincerity? Did they buy a dinner and invite Fong Po Kuan to sit in same table with Kit to express regret like Pak Lah did to the aggrieved judges?
No – their explicit apology was not acceptable as an apology because it did not satisfy the four prerequisites of what an effective apology is or ought to be, I outlined above.
So Pak Lah said the government regretted but it won’t apologise (and I’ve given my reasons for that in my posting at 08: 15.05
in the other earlier thread “Umno and BN’s post-March 8 schizophrenia”) – so what about it, was there no effective apology in reality when all prerequisites of an effective apology have been met in last night’s dinner? Wasn’t there an apology???
I think there was.
#25 by MY VIEW on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 2:35 pm
A positive move by PM for the people and country. He cannot turn back the clock. So monetary compensation is the best for the innocent former CJ and the Federal Court Judges. To further accomplish the peoples wish is to have a Judicial Commission. Don’t let the culprits who have caused the sufferings of innocent men, to escape justice especially Lingam who have made the country a laughing stock. Don’t forget the mastermind. He is still walking free making a fool of the country’s present leadership.
#26 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 2:54 pm
Unless we know amount of ex gratia payment (eg a paltry RM1,000 per ex judge) how do we know “ex gratia” payment is not full and proper recompense???
And since the quantum and the amount is not really an issue – don’t tell me these judges of integrity are looking at the amount, when then is the issue?
Apology – It has already been impliedly given as I said about the 4 prerequisites of effective apology met last night!
Ex gratia means a recompense without admission of liability/guilt.
And there cannot be an admission of guilt/liability by present government on behalf of past Tun Dr Mahathir ‘s government because rightly or wrongly it has been determined by the present government not to revisit and re-open old wounds of the past and since the latter predecessor government has not been made subject of enquiry and investigation (as that of a Royal Commission), where is the adjudication and determination of previous government’s guilt and liability that present is supposed to apologise for??? Can we just base it on certain sections of public opinion??? If present govt admits gulit/liability where none is proven (except in court of certain public opinion) and give formal apology for that, it will give Tun Dr Mahathir extra ammunition to shoot the present for pandering to populist appeals without concern for what is right and wrong!
#27 by dawsheng on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 2:58 pm
(New Straits Times) – They may be sworn enemies but next week, representatives from Umno, Parti Keadilan Rakyat and Pas will meet to achieve a common goal.
The meeting is at the initiative of Umno supreme council member Datuk Mohamad Norza Zakaria who has been in contact with both PKR vice-president Mohamed Azmin Ali and Pas Youth chief Salahuddin Ayub over the past few days to arrange details.
“This is my own idea but I think it is timely especially after the results of the 12th general election,” Mohamad Norza said.
He said other supreme council members did not object to the meeting.
He said some of the issues to be discussed included matters relating to religion, education as well as the New Economic Policy.
He added that the three parties would try to determine where exactly the Malays stood at this point in time in terms of economic well-being.
http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/6270/84/
#28 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:05 pm
But why is race an issue after 8th March 2008???
They may be sworn enemies but next week, can representatives from DAP, MCA, Gerakan and MIC meet to achieve a common goal – where exactly the Non Malays stood at this point in time in terms of economic well-being.
#29 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:06 pm
sorry – “in terms of political well-being”.
#30 by MY VIEW on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:20 pm
I feel the other parties should not do what UMNO, PKR and PAS is doing. It’s totally negative to racial unity. It’s nothing good for the country. UMNO is the culprit who initiate this so called race/religious meeting. We all know that UMNO devide and rule all these while for their survival. The other parties need not emulate this negative event.
#31 by LALILOo on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:21 pm
As Tun’s dirty linen are being washed in public one after another, it is no wonder that he is dead set in getting rid of AAB in order to stop more juicy stuffs from getting to the public. From the crooked bridge to the Lingam tape and Tun Salleh sacking, one by one these high-handed decisions that he made are coming back to haunt him.
Lastly, the thought of Anwar becoming the next PM is already given Tun nightmares. Will Anwar retaliate back for all that he has been wronged for?
That is why, to Tun, Anwar must never be given the chance to become a PM, at least in Tun’s lifetime. That is why, a weak AAB must go and someone strong should takeover and continue to protect his wrongdoing.
Darn, politics has never been that interesting until now.
#32 by pwcheng on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:25 pm
If the Non-Malays were to meet to achieve a common goal, it will be seditious. The non- Malay parties, I bet will never dare to do what UMNO does. They had too often been told “do what I tell you to do and do not do what I am doing”
#33 by novice101 on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:27 pm
We are talking about Fairness, aren’t we!
Knowing the constraints the PM is facing and the difficult situation he is in, he deserves to be commended for what he has done. The wronged judges there last night expressed satisfaction with what was proposed by the PM. This matter should be left with the PM to take it forward for its implementation.
There may be some who are are still dissatisfied, they think the PM has not gone far enough. Let us give credit where credit is due. In the past 20 years of Mahathir’s rule, no one had managed to nudge Mahathir an inch! Now, AAB has, on his own volition (albeit with some pressure from the GE12 result), has instituted some changes. This is more than what Mahathir had ever conceded. One may be still unforgiving and is adamant to want to extract more, but it would be good to remind oneself that one was also around in the 20 years Mahathir was the prime minister, what had one extracted from the man himself. Nothing, nought!
If one still feels more can be done and wants the PM and his government to go along that line, then it is for one to monitor, prompt, direct, advise and guide them.
Let us give credit where credit is due!
#34 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:36 pm
//If the Non-Malays were to meet to achieve a common goal, it will be seditious// -pwcheng. Ok but we’re talking about participation of Pakatan Rakyat’s partners PKR & PAS. If that’s OK to DAP – and DAP cannot meet with MCA, Gerakan and MIC) does it not imply DAP to PKR and PAS is not different from MCA/Gerakan to UMNO under BN, and if so what’s the difference between Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional’s so called equal power sharing premises in context of race hegemony???
#35 by pwcheng on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:36 pm
By the way , what our sleepy head ( not so sleepy nowadays after PR gave him a dose of wake up mixture) said yesterday in the Bar Council Dinner might be forgotten in a few days time. Can we give him the benefit of the doubt this time after the march 8 trashing? I am afraid a leopard will never change its spot.
#36 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:40 pm
pw cheng says, “If the Non-Malays were to meet to achieve a common goal, it will be seditious”.
By your logic if PR’s partners PKR & PAS can meet UMNO, and DAP cannot meet with MCA, Gerakan and MIC, what is the difference between Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional’s power sharing premises in terms of equality?
If PKR participates does it not connote it is a malay based rather than multi-racial party?
#37 by Tickler on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:48 pm
Najib: Payment is no apology
http://malaysiakini.com/news/81577
#38 by Tickler on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:48 pm
Oh-oh, I forgot:
Na jib: Payment is no apology
http://malaysiakini.com/news/81577
#39 by MY VIEW on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 3:59 pm
Samy: Dr M has weakened BN
RK Anand | Apr 18, 08 11:23am
—————————————————————
Actually Mahathiu has weakened UMNO but has wrecked BN. He doesn’t care. All he wants is his crooked bridge.
#40 by MY VIEW on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:05 pm
Tickler Says:
Today at 15: 48.39 (11 minutes ago)
Oh-oh, I forgot:
Na jib: Payment is no apology
———————————————————
Yes, only the person who has the power to simply dismissed Judges should apologised.
#41 by Cinapek on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:07 pm
I will believe AAB’s Judicial Appointment Commission after I have seen it happening. And I will believe his sincerity after I have seen who he has appointed to the Commission.
Learning from the experience of the IPCMC and its watered down version now awaiting Parliamentary approval, I have little faith in his promise to deliver. This is further amplified by his feet dragging over the Lingam tape case during which time the guilty parties managed to work out their answers for the RCI. Sounds too convenient.
And he unshamedly claims credit for setting up the Judicial Appointment Commission in his speech last night when he said …..”The Government has set the ball rolling. We have put forward initial, but vital, steps.Now it is for all parties concerned – the judiciary, the Bar, civil society and the public at large – to also play their respective roles in facilitating these reforms.” Tak malu to make this claim. The Govt was trying to throw the ball out. It was the Bar Council march to his office that set the ball rolling. Even then he tried to play dirty by using his FRU goons to intimidate the marchers. And we all remember what his hatchet man Nazri called the marchers. And now AAB had the gall to claimed the Govt. set the ball rolling.
#42 by Bigjoe on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:18 pm
They can’t issue an apology because an apology would be an admission of guilt legally – basis for class-action suit that is could number in thousands running into billions even with limits of damages.
Again, the modus operandi is still cover-up and move on…
#43 by Tickler on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:24 pm
Yes, only the person who has the power to simply dismissed Judges should apologised – posted above
_________________________________
In truth I would opine that what would be more preferable is an RCI to investigate in depth the misdeeds and absolute perversion of power which would ultimately result in AG, ACA, IGP answerable to parliament.
That is not to punish the Artful Dodger, but to clean up the corrupt system that is being perpetuated.
#44 by shortie kiasu on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:25 pm
Ex gratia payments to the ‘six’ has nothing to do with the judiciary reform.
Unless and until the Article 121(1) of the Constitution is reverted, whatever Abdullah and BN introduce are just cosmetic dressing.
Do they have the gut and wisdom to undo what was done it? That is a million dollars question.
#45 by daniel on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:31 pm
Just musing on a technicality.
1. The Tun Salleh and the other judges were handed a judgement by a judicial tribunal. Does the government have the authority to reverse that decision?
2. Assuming that the government does have the authority to overturn the decision of the tribunal which heard the case, wouldn’t it then, place the blame, and hence suspicion of being beholden to the previous government, squarely on the members of the tribunal?
#46 by HJ Angus on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:35 pm
I think Zaid mentioned seeking the help of the Opposition to amend the Constitution and Prof Farooq also touched on this during the Bernama talk-show this morning.
#47 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:44 pm
Malaysiakini reported – “Also present was Azmi Kamaruddin, the supreme court judge who was suspended then.
He said that former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, and not his successor Abdullah, who should be apologising to the judges.
“Why should the present prime minister apologise? He has done nothing. (Mahathir) should apologise if he is a gentleman – it is not apologising to the judges but to the country,” he added.
Asked if he felt vindicated, he replied: “Not vindicated, but I feel the sacrifices I have made (were worthwhile). So I am a very happy man tonight. Thank God if I die, I have heard this speech.”
Azmi also described Abdullah’s announcement to reform the judiciary a good start which needs to be carried out step by step”.
#48 by sheriff singh on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 4:47 pm
It was disappointing that there were no apologies for Salleh Abbas and his former colleagues. Najib said today the government’s ex gratia payment did not amount to an apology. So what kind of victory, moral or otherwise, is this?
Sure they get “ex-gratia” payments but what about back pay and damages? This ex-gratia is like “goodwill” money out of the government’s generosity, thats about it. Like bonus money they freely give out to civil servants.
And with this payment, all black stains should and must just disappear? The 6 judges are all still on record as having been charged with misconduct although some were later cleared. Their careers came to abrupt end for most of them.
The government should come out plain and say the decisions of the Committees of Enquiry are “unsafe” and “suspect” and can no longer be relied upon.
The government should not just say “lets move on” with this ex-gratia payment. All wrongs must be put right first, painful as they may be. The people demands it.
Having said the above, one must also not over glorify the 6 judges too much. They were merely doing their jobs without fear or favour. Unfortunately they bumped against the likes of Tun Mahathir who had other sentiments and thoughts. The 6 were seen to have been victimised. The rest is history.
Let us all call for a full enquiry to exonerate or confirm the guilt of the 6. And punish any perpetrators and wrong doers of this sordid affair. Only a proper enquiry with full integrity, transparency and accountability can bring this matter to a proper close.
#49 by merdeka on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 5:17 pm
NO APOLOGY !!! I repeat NO APOLOGY. So stop talking about APOLOGY. The 6 wronged judges are willing to attend the function & have accepted it, what more can we do ?????
#50 by i_love_malaysia on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 5:34 pm
What do we expect from a disappointed PM? of course a disppointed judicial reform speech & disappointed action plans to restore justice and trust!!! read my lips, those appointed to the JAC will disappoint all of us, too . As the Chinese saying goes, if the top column of the building is not straight, those columns below will be the same,too i.e. if the top leadership is not right (corrupt, power crazy etc), those below them will follow suit!!! So, the top needs to be changed, before we talk about the change at the bottom!!!Got it!!!
#51 by Loh on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 5:45 pm
///”The formation of this commission, it must be emphasised, is only in an advisory capacity. The final authority still lies with the prime minister to make the formal recommendation to the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong and the Council of Rulers./// DPM Najib, MalaysiaToday
So, what is left unsaid was that the PM can have the recommendations but he can ignore the recommendation and choose whom he likes. The PM would still be legally correct for not following the recommendations of the Commission, but only morally wrong for not doing it.
TDM claimed that he had all the authority to do what it did. He was legally correct to do what he did. However, the address by PM AAB at the Bar Council dinner on 17 April quoted below had relevance on TDM’s moral value:
“For many, the events of 1988 were an upheaval of the nation’s judicial system. Rightly or wrongly, many disputed both the legality and morality of the related proceedings, for me, personally, I feel it was a time of crisis from which the nation never fully recovered……/ And yet the legacy of 1988 haunts us until today.”
From PM AAB’s perspective, the legacy of 1988, created by TDM haunts us until today. Without going into the morality issue, TDM did the wrong things, or to him the right things which the country has to pay for his actions.
TDM should have apologized to the citizens for taking the legally correct (let us give him the benefit of doubt) but morally wrong decision to cause harm to the country and to the six judges who were serving the nation manning one of the three branches of government which they were appointed to perform.
Since TDM is still alive, he should apologize like a human being would. If he is dead, then the BN government should do it on his behalf. Even though PM AAB did not say sorry on behalf of the government, he had said enough and that the government of the day which created the 1988 legacy should have apologized.
When Najib emphasized that the PM had the final authority to submit names to the King, he was only following the action of TDM.
The non-UMNO BN component parties accepted PM AAB as president of BN and as Prime minister of the country. A new UMNO President has to be accepted by them as President of BN which they belong. They should assess whether the next President of UMNO had the right moral value to be the prime minister. Looks like AAB had to arrange moral training for his successor before handling over the power.
Moral value should be an issue for the next UMNO party election.
#52 by Godfather on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 5:46 pm
If you had been expecting more, much more, from Badawi, you will puke when you hear what else Najib had to say about the proposed “reforms”.
#53 by TTDI_KL on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 5:47 pm
Don’t just blame UMNO for calling meeting of PAS and PKR. Blame PAS and PKR for responding to such call. Never change lah Malaysia this Melayu thing.
#54 by TTDI_KL on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 5:51 pm
Hello Jeffrey, PW Cheng is being sarcastic lah. PKR and PAS can not and should not meet UMNO, period. bunkum lah.
#55 by Loh on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 6:12 pm
Clause (3A) was added to article 145: Attorney General, when it was amended together with article 121. It reads:
///(3A) Federal law may confer on the Attorney General power to determine the courts in which or the venue at which any proceedings which he has power under clause (3) to institute shall be instituted or to which such proceedings shall be transferred.///
So, Article 145 now allows the Attorney General to choose his ‘friends’ to be referee for his cases. He does not need to have every judge to be with him, only one or a few for a sure win.
Beside setting up a Judicial Appointment Commission, Articles 121 and 145 should revert back to its original version. Otherwise the 1988 legacy will continue to haunt us; a next AAB might never surface at all.
#56 by Bigjoe on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 6:30 pm
I realized in the speech that the PM said that ‘all parties will have input..’. on the judicial commission on appointment. Its a disaster waiting to happen?
#57 by waterfrontcoolie on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 6:39 pm
many of you are too idealistic to the core. I believe this is a good start; though he should done it some time after ’04 GE, he would have the total support of Malaysians at grassroot level. Now it is a little late,though it is better late than never.
This may be the starting step; do remember many actions once started may be difficult to stop. And I hope this is one of them. To the politicians, all issues are political, hence political factors can not be distanced, it is part of the issue.
Inspite of his short comingS, this step should be lauded and it is hoped that Zaid could use this act as a begining to what he has in mind. It is great to do some admirable acts just before one says good-bye. It will be remembered for eternity. Give him some space to clear his mind so that he can take another GREAT step forward.
#58 by undergrad2 on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 7:16 pm
“While the constitutional prerogative of the prime minister to put forward names to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong will remain, the commission will help to evaluate and vet candidates in a systematic and credible manner for the prime minister, based on clearly- defined criteria.”
It would help if apart from well-defined criteria, there are also equally defined criteria to exclude certain people from being made nominee for the highest judicial post in the country.
Granted it would be unrealistic to expect an examination of the government nominee for the post by any judicial committee of the House, as in the United States where the nominee’s private life is also put under the microscope, through a transparent process, what assurance do we have that this “clearly defined criteria is correctly applied – if applied at all?
Will the “clearly-defined criteria” the PM spoke of be made public? In the U.S. a skirt-chaser would not qualify for the highest judicial post in the country.
This reference to the prerogative of the Prime Minister to put forward names to the King is a reference to the system of constitutional monarchy and to the model referred to as the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy. Respectfully, I think it would be putting a stress on the process if the monarch is made part of and relied on to solve any difference of opinion.
#59 by badak on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 7:40 pm
The family of the six judges must sue the goverment for wrongful sacking and spoiling their names.The reason Pak lah brought up this issue again ,is not because of JUSTICE,But because he want,s to get back at Tun M.
It,s not only the judges that was sack suffered but all Malaysian.How many cases was won or lost because of money changing hands.The LINGAM video alone shows how bad the judiciary is.
Every one knows that ANWAR was tried in a kagaroo court.
#60 by devilmaster on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 9:03 pm
Isu ketuanan Melayu hanya gimik Umno, buang masa bincang
Kudos to PAS!
#61 by cemerlang on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 9:13 pm
What’s that word again ? Accountability.
#62 by haveaview on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 9:17 pm
SIR,
THEY have forgotten the poor chap AHMAD NOR too…. i heard he nows drive an old proton…
#63 by haveaview on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 9:17 pm
Give ANWAR and family compensation too…
#64 by undergrad2 on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 9:26 pm
Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak today said that no apology was forthcoming for former lord president Salleh Abas and the five judges affected by the 1988 judicial crisis.” Malaysiakini
I suppose the ex gratia payments come with a condition i.e. that it is not to be regarded as an acknowledgement of liability on the part of the government (and therefore “no apology is forthcoming”), that it is a goodwill gesture to acknowledge the pain and suffering the judges have had to undergo as a result of the events of 1988.
We are supposed to feel that something is better than nothing and it is never too late. We have to admit that it does undo the damage done to their reputation and save their legacy. We can all agree that the ex gratia payments are not intended to compensate the victims for torts committed as when the victim of a tort sues the tortfeasor for damages. The ex gratia payment apparently is an acknowledgement of the pain and suffering caused but falls short of an admission by the government for any wrongdoing – a goodwill gesture, nothing more and nothing less.
If the victims are happy with that, who are we to say they should not be happy?
#65 by raven77 on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 9:45 pm
The only way the apology and proper redress is going to take place is from the next government. So…the soon the BN is out of power….the faster Malaysia can start over…..and meanwhile ..if I were Mahathir I would be looking for a place to exile to…..together with Mugabe, Gyanendra..etc…..
#66 by Loh on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:08 pm
Loh Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Today at 17: 45.18 (4 hours ago)
#67 by kickbutt on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:12 pm
“Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it. ”
Mahatma Gandhi
#68 by kickbutt on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:40 pm
“The objective of such a Judicial “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission should not be punitive but to find out what went wrong..” YB Kit
I don’t see how the two could be separated.
#69 by Joshua Tan Kok Hauw on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:54 pm
The judicial appointment commission’s existence should be safeguarded by putting it into the Federal Constitution, or else it may be abolished by BN at any time as they like.
The above mentioned commission’s members should also include parliamentarians and representatives of Bar Council.
#70 by allen ng on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 10:55 pm
I think this is political bribery.It does not serve any purpose as it is only for monetary gain.What is the use of the money when an apology is not given to them?
#71 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:07 pm
According to Malaysiakini’s report [Chan Kok Leong | Apr 18] Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak doubly made known “that no apology is forthcoming for former lord president Salleh Abas and the five judges affected by the 1988 judicial crisis” and as regards the proposed Judicial Appointment Commission, “it must be emphasized that the formation of this (Judicial Appointment) commission is only at an advisory capacity. The final authority still lies with the prime minister to make the formal recommendation to the Yang DiPertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers.
“But it is still an important step forward because it means the prime minister will now have the benefit of some very learned people to give their opinions on the suitability of appointing certain personalities to the various positions in the judiciary.”
Like that – my opinion is that it is no go. It simply means that opinions and recommendations from important stakeholders/Judicial Appointments Commission can be made to a Prime Minister who at the end can ignore and reject everyone’s opinions and recommendations and then make formal recommendation of a crony and subservient and compliant nominee to the Yang DiPertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers.
Then whats the point of Judicial Appointment Commission? It’s just a whitewash to give an impression of independent appointment when there is actually none.Where’s institutional check and balance? Why play this cat and mouse game as if rakyat have no brains???
I think these people won’t agree with you lah, Pak Lah & Zaid & other UMNO reformists, better work something out with Anwar.
#72 by HJ Angus on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:08 pm
Let us see how long it will take to set up the JAC and how it is composed and the duties and authority assigned to them.
I agree it is a good start to reform the Judiciary. If the PR takes control of Putrajaya, they can do more.
#73 by Jeffrey on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:19 pm
HJ Angus, Deputy Prime Minister Najib already preempted –
“it must be emphasized that the formation of this (Judicial Appointment) commission is only at an advisory capacity. The final authority still lies with the prime minister to make the formal recommendation to the Yang DiPertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers. But it is still an important step forward because it means the prime minister will now have the benefit of some very learned people to give their opinions on the suitability of appointing certain personalities to the various positions in the judiciary.” – Malaysiakini’s report [Chan Kok Leong | Apr 18] .
#74 by undergrad2 on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:39 pm
Mahathir is probably dancing in his room to MC Hammer’s and screaming “You can’t touch me!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMzoBkaFxh4&feature=related
#75 by undergrad2 on Friday, 18 April 2008 - 11:42 pm
..or maybe this more updated version.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc&feature=related
#76 by dawsheng on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 12:09 am
What is the meaning of justice uttered from the mouth of a person who practices injustice? Just what significant it does to the past injustice committed by another person when in reality they are like two peas in a pod. As long as any Malaysian is still under oppression, discrimination and suffer injustice of all kinds under that same person, the talks of delivering justice and renewing trust is hollow.
Obviously, this is just another event where promises are never kept. Though a little compensation were dished out to the few who were wronged and suffered injustice in the past, the action is certainly not inspired by clear conscience, but only to fulfill one’s political motives and agendas. While those at the receiving end were filled with joy with tears in their eyes after their heroic acts were finally recognized, but what about the other Malaysians who are being locked up unlawfully? Are they going to wait another 20 years or so to see that justice is done to them?
I could not find a better words than to describe the event last night as the Theater of Shame, a mockery of justice that stinks to high heaven. But how can it not be when the Mother of Judicial Crisis meets the Mother of all Hypocrisy?
#77 by Jong on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:22 am
Shame, shame, shame! It’s disappointing, real disappointing that Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi did not, could have done more. How hard was it take just a little step forward to express regret and say “sorry” on BN/UMNO government’s behalf? What is said about them is true, it’s in Umno’s culture or was it Islam Hardhari’s, although we all know they have wronged the former Lord President Tun Salleh Abbas and the 6 former judges. Anwar Ibrahim too.
The old jackal has been given a free-run far too long, he should be made accountable for all the lives he had destroyed and hardship he had caused to so many Malaysians during his 22 years reign. Prime Minister AAB should see to it that it is done before he himself is being destroyed.
#78 by Jong on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:25 am
sorry, should read: “…is true, it’s not in Umno’s culture to apologise or was…. “
#79 by dawsheng on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:28 am
KUALA LUMPUR, April 18 (Bernama) — The government’s move to set up a judicial appointments commission is not aimed at satisfying the wishes of opposition parties, Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek said today.
According to him, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had long wished for the judiciary to be a strong and independent pillar of government.
“As such, the question of fullfilling the wishes of the opposition does not arise,” he said when asked to comment on remarks by Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) president Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail that the opposition parties had championed this for a long time.
Ahmad Shabery said the Barisan Nasional (BN) government had addressed this issue even in its 2004 election manifesto.
It could not be implemented in the BN’s previous term of office as there were other more pressing issues then, he said.
These included emphasis on the concept of integrity, attending to the Ninth Malaysia Plan’s economic needs and setting up development corridors to ensure equitable distribution of the economic pie, said Ahmad Shabery,
“The decision by the Prime Minister (to set up the commission) should be viewed positively and supported by all as it is aimed at strengthening the judiciary,” he said.
“Parti Keadilan Rakyat and Wan Azizah should remember (PKR advisor Datuk Seri) Anwar (Ibrahim) himself did nothing to rectify the situation when he was in the government,” he added.
The setting up of the council was announced by Abdullah at a dinner organised by the Bar Council here last night.
#80 by beankadok on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:34 am
Ahmad Shabery is learning fast to be another goblok!
#81 by cucu adam on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:45 am
The political tsunami of March 8 had started to make the BN/UMNO recognized some of their past mistakes. The Judicial Reforms would not have taken place if they had won a two thirds majority.
The UMNO/BN will on and off starts to show they care about the country and the people. The Judicial Reforms they are proposing is one of the few that they think, if carried out will win the hearts and the minds of the people, and they are hoping they can easily make a come back.
Imagine the scenario if Abdullah had introduced the proposed Judicial Reforms during his first term in office. He would easily have won the 12th. General Election, and that even matched the previous General Election results.
Of course another reason for the Judicial Reforms is to put to shame Tun Mathair Muhammad, who was the main culprit for making the Malaysian judiciary a mockery. Abdullah hoped that the proposal reforms will damage Mathair’s reputation and will silence him. Of course Mathair, as expected will continue to make noises and express his opinions in order to save his own skin.
In the past there were requests that a judicial review been made on the sacking of Tun Salleh, but was totally thrown out, and one of those who felt that such review was not necessary was none other that Dato Nazri (Minister in PM Dept). It will be interesting if he agrees with what Abdullah proposed to do. Will he resign from office? I have my doubt.
How will those who formed the Tribunals and found Tun Salleh and the other judges as guilty and removed from offices feel. Let us also not forget the roles played by former Attorney General in the sacking of Tun Salleh and the other judges. Should these people be punished for the wicked roles that they had played.
I would even go further that the appointments of some judges from the day Tun Salleh was removed were highly questionable. Were they appointed on their merits of was it because they were faithfully to their political masters. Surely some explanations need to be given.
#82 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 2:12 am
Hence there will not be any real closure. None should be expected.
#83 by Jong on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 2:22 am
Has anybody an idea who is in charge, Abdullah AB or Mohd Najib? Less than 24 hours of PM’s speech at Bar Council dinner and Najib was already explaining the government’s stand on the ex-gratia payment announced by the PM.
Did Najib not read what Zaid Ibrahim said “Sorry can be said in many ways” ? Perhaps he forgot who were the crowd the PM was addressing?
#84 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 4:27 am
We can all kiss the commission and the mission goodbye! And here’s me doin’ the MC Hammer – just like Mahathir is doin’.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0qn8Dvxs3M&feature=related
#85 by kickbutt on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 6:56 am
What have you been smoking Undergrad2??
#86 by jooguan on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 7:24 am
There are a few doubts have to be answer before we could expect any REAL improvement on the announcement.
1. Whom is the upcoming judicial appointments commission reporting to? If it is answering to the PM, then it is just like our BPR (ACA). Then, the same vulnerability in the system remain after it is setup.
2. Who appoints the members of the commission? Again, if it is by the PM, then it is just like MPPP (Majlis Perbandaran P.Pinang) where all members are from the same big (pro-BN) family. And again the problem is the un-ethical commission members have to make the PM happy if they want to keep their job (read benefit/power). This has to be considered when designing a “secure” system.
3. I agree that we should compensate the judges fairly but if a judge is taking up the job just because of the money (power could lead to money at the end) then we have a big problem that any un-ethical judge could be bought. So, no matter how well the appointments commission works, the judicial system won’t be robust. Instead, we should rebuild the image of judges as impartial, ethical, respectful, and key contributors to our country’s success etc. Sometimes, the intangible and spiritual aspects outweigh material rewards. The pride of being a judge has to be there. Or else, we shouldn’t expect anything high standard / quality result from the judge and judiciary system.
4. If we all somewhat agree and suspect that there were something really wrong with the constitutional amendments that eroded the judiciary power, what are we doing about it now? Just pure watching and talking about it is hardly sufficient. Is there a plan to review the amendments and revert them to uphold the true spirit of judiciary by constitution? Merely discussing it publicly does not help in the long run and it couldn’t prevent the future PM (ethical or un-ethical) to exploit the amendments as it is granted by constitution (so there is no question of un-ethical here actually).
On the bright side of the news, at least we see the government is more serious about this today but this is still far from achieving an independent, respectful, and fair judiciary system. Hopefully it will be a better tomorrow for Malaysia.
Lastly, just a few words to Abdullah: To admit the past mistakes and offer apology, it requires courage. To correct the mistake and put in place a good system to prevent it to happen again, this requires wisdom. A smart people leverages on others’ wisdom and this itself shows a wisdom.
#87 by k1980 on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 8:32 am
The Perak fools who voted for the mca
http://maverickysm.blogspot.com/2008/04/perak-mca-cari-makan-deal.html
#88 by HJ Angus on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 10:10 am
Yes the DPM’s statement seems to undermine the PM’s efforts.
Now we know how he will treat the JAC if he becomes the PM in the future.
#89 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 10:33 am
Whether PM’s ‘expression of regret’ was sufficient apology and ex-gratia payment sufficient recompense for sufferings of the judges wronged – I have said why to me they were – it suffices as commendable start that the government at least acknowledges that the nation has a judicial problem and is prepared to move forward with establishment of a Judicial Appointments Commission.
To be sure the government can do more and has not satisfied expectations of those who call and demand for a Royal Commission to enquire the wherefores of the Judicial crisis 1988, a process which will invariably bring into spot alight the roles of then premier TDM, Tun Hamid & AG, and who knows even de-facto Opposition leader DSAI who was then deputy PM.
Is it good to rake up the past? Pak Lah said “it is not wise or useful to revisit this past decision as it would serve to prolong the sense of crisis – something our nation can do without”.
On the other side of the argument, if the nation does not probe history and learn how and why 1988 judicial crisis happened, how does it prevent such recurrence in the future?
That is also true but in the process of delving into the past, it is inescapable that there will inevitably be apportionment of blame to key culprits, and the gate will be opened not just for moral judgment by public of their ignominious conduct but also conceivably follow up call for their legal and criminal prosecution…..
That too, one may say it is OK : it is called accountability and transparency; if one did wrong, the past would catch up and accountability is not escaped and this will send a strong signal by way of deterrence to all potential and would-be abusers of power, that they cannot escape….
But we also know that the country has been so long in “darkness” with all kinds of abuses going on that to vigorously rake the past is basically to open the Pandora box from which will spring so much sewage that it will drive the last nail into the coffin laid in place on March 8th . Yes a Royal Commission may from its advocates’ point of view be a step towards national healing but it is healing that is unacceptable to a ruling coalition (already in throes of implosion) as it spells its earlier demise.
It should be obvious that Zaid said one thing, Najib another and Pak Lah in between, the factional forces within ruling party are still contending, and the outcome can only be known later. In the light of existing realities, there is only so much we can expect of and push Pak Lah as we know he is subject to pressure of strong factions within ruling party set against the re-opening and re-visiting the “sins” of the past committed by those in power. The PM’s position is precarious amid calls from certain quarters that he steps down, and he has to tread carefully. We have also to ask if he missteps and falls, what would happen to the judicial reforms that he and his people like Zaid propose?
Regarding the Govt’s approach of not raking the past and moving forward, we can only hope the Zaid could within next 3 months push through the reforms, the principal of which is to ensure that (1) the Judicial Appointments Commission is staffed by sufficient relevant stakeholders from legal fraternity and civil society upholding democracy and independence of judiciary and not those beholden to power and (2) the appointment of judges cannot be left to the sole prerogative of the Prime Minister alone. The advice of such Judicial Appointments Commission to the PM cannot be just “advisory” only as Najib said that the PM could reject but directory in the sense that he cannot recommend to Yang di Pertuan Agong someone that either Judicial Appointments Commission or the Rulers reject……
So whilst we content ourselves that the first start has been made, it remains to be seen whether meaningful steps, and not mere cosmetic whitewash to hoodwink public, will be implemented by the govt before there can be meaningful rejoice.
The only consolation is that the Malaysian public and civil society is vibrant enough at this moment to generate the political tsunami of March 8th (by ballot box and not street fights) and in its wake prevail on the government to reverse its course to at least ostensibly revamp and redeem an important institution like judiciary – something that neighbouring countries have not been able to do and are now apparently taking notes.
We owe one to Pak Lah that he accepted March 8th verdict with the grace of “point taken” rather than try anything funny as happened the last time in 1969 when the ruling coalition lost two thirds majority. So let us give him some space and opportunity to try do what he failed to do after 2004, and make our judgment later.
#90 by Godfather on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 10:39 am
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, the ex-gratia payments do not constitute an apology. The issue of apology does not arise.
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, the proposed judicial commission reports to the PM’s office, and all recommendations are subject to PM’s endorsement before they are put forward to the Agong for approval. The issue of independence of the judicial commission does not arise.
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, these changes are not made because we want to meet the Opposition demands. The issue of adopting Opposition demands does not arise.
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, thieves are incapable of reforming themselves. The issue of reform within BN does not arise.
#91 by Jong on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 10:43 am
clap clap clap! well said Godfather.
#92 by Chong Zhemin on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 11:17 am
Uncle Kit,
I think you need these DAP MP to give the people a good explanation.
There are 29 MPs that did not submit a question for the coming parliamentary session. and guess what. 5 of them are from DAP, 9 from PKR.
I dun feel like posting their names here, go and see for yourself.
I am so disappointed now.
http://iamamalaysian.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/the-height-of-irresponsibility-29-mps-did-not-submit-parliamentary-questions/
#93 by Jong on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 11:35 am
Let’s hope AAB lasts the next 3 months and even if he does, at the rate he does things, it might just be another draggy “point taken”. I hope I am wrong.
#94 by pwcheng on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 11:59 am
Let us not believe this guy too much. From records, it is better to take the surface value of what he said if we are not prepared to face further frustrations.
What happen to the IPCMC? Are those guys sitting in the Commission not credible? At the LAST MILE he will water it down. I stressed on the word last mile because that is the connecting point to the rakyat and he had failed miserably on that. I will not be far too wrong for the same thing to happen to the Judicial Appointments Commission. This guy is just good for slogans and acts of “surface value matters” on the advice of his cronies. When coming to the implementation or hard core matters that affect the country and the people which invariably will affect his cronies, he will withdraw into his cocoon and the subject matter will mutate into something else. We are already hearing insinuating voices and if we are clever enough to interpret them, it is telling us “do not have too much hope”
There are too many past records to mention and this guy is not a man of substance but substandard. Even his http://www.warkahuntukpm.com.my is a farce, and I think many will agree with me if they had taken the trouble to write in. There was only an auto reply on or before the 7th of March 2008. The end result, soon it will fade away.
After 4-5 years experiences we must be naïve if we are still unable to understand his style of governance or guided governance and the mechanism that drives the working of his government.
#95 by Damocles on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 12:28 pm
“I am wondering – why DAP in all urban areas, PKR in semi-urban and PAS in rural? What determines these? Definitely the composition of voters.
Do we malaysians really ready for non-racial governments? As in the earlier article?” Wargamalaysia
That’s the reality on the ground.
But there is some blurring of the racial divide during the 12thGE when voters go for the party rather than the race.
This change in attitude is good for the country but it will take some time to change the deeply ingrained attitude which is mainly fostered by the BN, especially UMNO.
#96 by pwcheng on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 12:30 pm
Jeffrey Says:
HJ Angus, Deputy Prime Minister Najib already preempted –
“it must be emphasized that the formation of this (Judicial Appointment) commission is only at an advisory capacity.
You cannot blame him on that as he will really feel uncomfortable if the Judiciary really becomes truly independent and credible, which I doubt very much it will ever happen. The dismantling of the judiciary had served them well for the past 20 over years and if possible they will want it that way to serve them forever. Why should you fix something when it can serve you better if it is broken.
The PM’s move is obvious, albeit with reluctance through the advice of the new de facto law minister. He of course knows that the fire is raging right under his feet. He has to do some damage control to stay relevant to the people and if he can put out those fire, business will be as usual.
#97 by Blind Faith on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 12:51 pm
Pak Lah to Jeffery QC: Sorry Jeffrey QC,
I think I’ll go with Lingam MC ( Mahathir’s Counsel )…
It looks like an apology,
It sounds like an apology,
but its really not an apology.
also,
It looks like a JAC,
It sounds like a JAC,
but its really me, the executive,
that has the final say.
also,
It looks like I’m deaf, dumb & blind,
It sounds like I’m deaf, dumb & blind,
but look who’s getting a prolonged,
standing ovation now…succkkers !!!
( Oh, I feel the love… they really,
really, love me…)
#98 by Jong on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:05 pm
Looks like he has obviously lost the people’s confidence and trust, much as we would like to help him outmanoeuvre the old jackal’s move to force his resignation.
PM AAB has no choice but to buck up and seriously walk his talk and do whatever is necessary to save this nation and also for his own political wellbeing, while he still has the power of Prime Minister.
#99 by Damocles on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:20 pm
“Moral value should be an issue for the next UMNO party election.” – Loh
We have a ruling party whose moral value is in doubt?
Don’t forget that the whole future direction of the country rests with these morally doubtful “leaders”.
Who would like to risks it?
I’m sure that there are many capable persons in this country who are also morally upright.
If not in UMNO, then in other political parties!
#100 by beankadok on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:20 pm
“They” are moving in fast and gathering momentum.
Prime Minister Abdullah must act fast and make changes where necessary. He should have known by now who his ‘friends’ are. My advice is, just get rid of them!
#101 by beankadok on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 1:23 pm
Change advisors, they are of no good!
#102 by TTDI_KL on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 4:11 pm
It looks like I’m deaf, dumb & blind,
It sounds like I’m deaf, dumb & blind,
but look who’s getting a prolonged,
standing ovation now…succkkers !!!
( Oh, I feel the love… they really,
really, love me…),,, Blind Faith
Yes too many among Malaysians including those in BAR Council are EVER ready to suck! This in fact explains why so much of abuse and misdeed happened in our country. WE have too many suckers.
#103 by catharsis on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 7:42 pm
Give him a break at least it is a step in the right direction…………..
#104 by kickbutt on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 9:39 pm
PM’s judicial reform speech is not judicious. Period.
#105 by alberttye on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 10:35 pm
Abdullah seems unable or unwilling to shake off the Umno warlords surrounding him.
He seems very spontaneous to criticize when the matter involves DAP or Hindraf or other less privileged communities.
He may be a nice guy but that’s it !
#106 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Sunday, 20 April 2008 - 12:45 am
stevchew Says:
“April 18th, 2008 (2 days ago) at 13: 04.50
Although it is short of an apology, this is already a big slap to the face of TUN.”
Hello, I think the Tun deserves more than a big slap. He should be made to kow-tow (‘apologise’) to theose judges he abused. And why should taxpayers’ money be made to pay those judges for what is basically the fault of one man, Tun M. I would propose that Tun M be made to personally compensate these judges for their monetary losses with an appropriate ex-gratia as damges for all their sufferings over and above the apology.
#107 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 20 April 2008 - 2:49 am
“I would propose that Tun M be made to personally compensate these judges for their monetary losses with an appropriate ex-gratia as damages for all their sufferings over and above the apology.” HORNBILL
That’s the point. The ex gratia payment is not an apology, not an admission of any wrongdoing but just an acknowledgement of the personal sacrifice and suffering of the judges who were removed before the end of their tenure. How convenient.
If this were to be treated like an ordinary wrongful dismissal case, then the plaintiffs are entitled to monetary compensation not less than their last drawn salary multiply by the remaining years of service. That is only loss of earnings. With general and special damages and punitive damages the quantum would be way in excess of a few million ringgits.
The BN government must have taken legal advice and advised not to muddy the water by going so far as to admit to anything. Hence the “ex gratia” and the “no apology” position.
And that’s why Tun M is screaming “You can’t touch me” in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMzoBkaFxh4&feature=related
#108 by Jong on Sunday, 20 April 2008 - 9:02 am
hahaha, this must be your favourite video on youtube! :D
#109 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 20 April 2008 - 8:40 pm
You can see for yourself how my mom is so impressed!
#110 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 21 April 2008 - 1:33 pm
It is very easy for AAB and his gangs to govn our country – just pay those were wronged by them by using our money, taxpayers’ money!!! I propose to opposition to ask AAB or any one who suggest to compensate any one by first saying sorry to the rakyat for their mis-management of our country!!! Time to change!!! else we will become a bankrupt country before the next election due to compensation using taxpayers’ money!!!
#111 by lakilompat on Monday, 21 April 2008 - 5:20 pm
R u sick, Tun Dr. Mahathir already draw a very clear line that he bow to no one, even the govt. now believe that Tun Dr. Mahathir shud be responsible to apologize, the current govt. was just there to acknowledge the past mistakes but did not admit the mistakes as it was performed and done by Tun Dr. Mahathir not the current govt.