Lingam tape – Anwar’s explosive video clip on Judiciary Compromised

Anwar Ibrahim has produced an explosive video clip on Judiciary Compromised which has set off reverberations in the Palace of Justice, the corridors of power, offices and homes in the country as well as internationally.

The time for reckoning for the restoration of a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law cannot be put off any longer.

Malaysiakini has carried the transcript of the conversation between lawyer V.K. Lingam with Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz sometime in 2002, as recorded in the videoclip, viz:

“The CJ said he is relative to now Agong, so he wants to stay on to 68, so, Tengku Adnan, I told Tengku Adnan, yesterday I had a meeting with him.

He said PM is already very angry with him, he said no problem he is going to make you acting err.. confirm your position as PCA, working very hard then working very hard to get Tan Sri Mokhtar as CJM.

Ah, we just keep it confidential. I am working very hard on it. Then there is a letter, according to Tengku, I am going to see him tomorrow, there is a letter sent to CJ, I mean Tan Sri Dzaiddin, that Datuk Heliliah, Datuk Ramli, Datuk Ramli and Datuk Ma’roop be made judges, and he rejected Dr Andrew Chui and apa itu Zainuddin Ismail lah. Because Zainuddin Ismail condemned your appointment and Tan Sri Mokhtar’s appointment.

And then you also, you seems to wrote a letter for the remaining five be confirmed as judges. As per our memo I discuss with Tun Eusoff Chin and we sent the same memo to PM.

I just want to get a copy letter that that has been done.

And then Tan Sri Dzaiddin said he is going to recommend six people for the court of appeal, but until today the letter hasn’t come to PM. He never discuss, but neither he has sent the letter to PM. Yes he has not sent. I know it is under the constitution for judges all that is your job Datuk to send, but we don’t want to make it an issue now.

Ah. Ok Actually I told Tengku Adnan to inform PM, PM to call you for a meeting. I organize it so that Tengku Adnan will call you directly. And then I got your number, I will tell him to call you directly to for you to meet PM lah. So should be ok, then ar.. correct correct, it is very important that the key players must be there.

Correct x3. correct x2. You know that the same problem that Tun Eusoff Chin has. He tried to do all this and yet he has run out of soldiers. He couldn’t do it because many are from the other camp. Last time was unfortunate because Tun Daim was doing everything sabotaging, otherwise how are things with you – everything is ok?. No, don’t worry.

You know sometimes Tan Sri Vincent that half the time they are talking about judiciary rather than doing the work. But if I don’t do this part my work will be useless.

Ha ha ha. Ah yes.Correct x5, right x3 correct. Ah right susah. You see he has now up for six court of appeal judges, so that he can put his men before he retires.

Correct x3, ah and then ah, correct. But never-mind, I will do this, I will get Tengku Adnan to arrange for PM to call you and Tan Sri Vincent Tan for PM to call you. And you know why, actually, I am very grateful with Tan Sri Vincent Tan you know why, I brainwash you so much even I quarrel with him.

One day I went to Vincent Tan house, I fire him at the night in his house. I said bloody hell if you don’t do this who will do it?

All these people Tun Eusoff Chin, Datuk Ahmad Fairuz, Tan Sri Zainon all fought for that. Then he called Tengku Adnan. Tengku Adnan he said, saya bukan Perdana Menteri Malaysia lah, you know. If the old man doesn’t want to listen to me, go to hell.

He quarreled with me. I said never mind, never mind, you talk to PM again tomorrow morning to put Datuk Ahmad Fairuz to CJM. So next day morning he went and he called me back 9.30 that he said PM has already agreed.

So I said never mind, we hope for the best. So I said no harm trying, the worst that it can happen is that you lose. Being the old man, he is 76 years old, he gets whispers everywhere, and then you don’t whisper, he get taken away by the other side. But, now PM is very alert because every time he gets letters from Tan Sri Dzaiddin, he called Tengku Adnan, he said discuss with Vincent, come and discuss.

Yes yes, ya. Correct x2, ya, but you see although I know PM, I am a lawyer in practice my views are.. I go through them, I go through them lah. Ah x4.

And then Dzaiddin will call them telling that you went saw PM and you make a big issue out of it. Oh ya, I think so, I think so.

Ok, fine x4 ok x4

Ah x2 correct x2. Now I heard Raja Aziz, Raja Aziz two weeks ago spoke to my lawyer Thayalan, and another lawyer Ailan, in the high court, they have a case each other. So, Thayalan and Ailan asked Raja Aziz, how is Tan Sri Wan Adnan?

He said he is on his way down. But you know what is the shocking thing he said? Datuk Fairuz became CJM. He overruled everybody, in three months time, he is going be made PCA, and 6 months time he is going to be CJ. He said he can’t think, he’s shocked. He told us.

Ha, it seems that they are going to organize a campaign to run you down. But you just keep quite, don’t say anything. Even the press asked, you said I leave it to God, that’s all. Don’t say. I really like your message. You said you work very hard, what can I do? I leave it to God.

That’s the best answer Datuk that you can ever be.

Ah… I will also get Tan Sri to remind PM to put a Tan Sri-ship this year lah. This will elevate you, you know.

Oh yes x4. ha. Steve Shim got so fast, Tan Sri Chong waited for whole year to get Tan Sri-ship.

Ah.. My god that’s why, ah. Correct x4, ya x4 right x3 correct x2

Don’t worry, we organize this. If Tan Sri Vincent and Tengku Adnan want to meet you privately, they will, I will call you. We organize in a private arrangement, in a very neutral place.

No don’t worry, Datuk, I know how much you suffer for Tun Eusoff Chin. And Tun said Datuk Ahmad Fairuz 110% loyalty. We want to make sure our friends are there for the sake of the PM and the sake of the country.

Not for our own interest, not for our own interest. We want to make sure the country come first. Well, you suffered so well, so much you have done. For the election, Wee Choo Keong, everything. How much, no body would have done all these.

Yes, you know. Good lah. Don’t worry. I am constantly working on this.

Ya ya, don’t worry x2. We work hard on this. And Datuk, and then if Tan Sri Vincent and Tengku Adnan want to see you, I will organize it in such a confidential place.

Ok Datuk very best. God bless you and your family.

Ok. Thank you thank you. Bye.”

An immediate response from Tun Fairuz is called for. Is he going to confirm or deny the phone conversation?

  1. #1 by LittleBird on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 7:22 pm

    You win some, you lose some…but now I know why!

  2. #2 by Libra2 on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 7:27 pm

    These scums want God’s blessings? They deserve to burn in Hell X 1000.

  3. #3 by Libra2 on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 7:29 pm

    There will be police reports made and the police will intimidate bloggers for posting fake videos and finally Gani Patil will say there is no evidence that this video is genuine.Case closed. The saga continues.

  4. #4 by restek on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 8:07 pm

    Which PM is implicated here?TDM certainly.Nothing is surprising except for first, the existence of the video and second, where was this video all along.I remain hopeful that changes will occur as a result of this expose.I doubt it. I am such a pessimist…..or am I a realist?

  5. #5 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 8:21 pm

    Unbelievable but you better believe it, this is justice in Malaysia.

  6. #6 by devilmaster on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 8:57 pm

    yes, Dr Mahathir Mohamad – the Father of Corruption. I do not know how many years will we need to clean up the whole Judiciary.

  7. #7 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 8:59 pm

    Isn’t obvious that the PM is constantly being manipulated? Nothing that we don’t already know.

  8. #8 by digard on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 9:02 pm

    Youtube, anyone? – Malaysiakini videos never show on my system, don’t know why.

  9. #9 by grace on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 9:05 pm

    This is what our judiciary is all about???
    How can one win any case against the well connected?
    Yusuf Chin holidaying with Lingham – coincidents they claim!!! Just go to Malaysiakini to compare their flights itinarary! Barring the flights out to Singapore from Kuala Lumpur, the rest of their itinarry are 100% similarly. Probability of Such coincidence is much, much smaller than striking 4D.
    Obvious isn’t it!
    NOw Ahmad Fairuz and lingam . Hi!Hi!Hi.


  10. #11 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 9:28 pm

    Thanks to the courage of Anwar Ibrahim and a fearless independent alternative online bulletin (Malaysiakini), so we can have the chance to know about this.

    There must be an immediate appointment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry into this Lingam Tape matter. All Opposition parties, civil societies including the Malaysian Bar and the Human Rights Commission should press for this.

    The issue is too big to be swept under the carpet.

    If the Lingam Tape were genuine and not doctored, the last vestige of our pretence at independence of judiciary is ripped asunder to expose the situation for what it is – judicial appointments have nothing to do with competence, integrity or fairness but everything to do, as hitherto rumoured, with servility to and patronage from the PM, striking at the very heart of confidence of Malaysians as well as foreigners in our administration of justice.

    The present PM should distance himself from any attempt to protect and save the culprits from public ignominy : he should institute the Royal Commission of Inquiry to get to the bottom of this.

    What had happened if true is a strong argument for the instituting of Judicial Commission for appointment of judges in the same manner as the Royal Commission on police had suggested the IPCMC!

    This episode is the strongest argument yet that the appointment of judges cannot be left to the decisions of only two persons – the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice …

    All these shocking news is a reminder that what goes around comes around, and the Evil that men do, when they were in power, will haunt them even when they are near their end….

  11. #12 by LittleBird on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 9:40 pm

    As usual nothing will happened. Remember Wee Chee Keong and if anyone care remember Manjit Singh?

  12. #13 by LittleBird on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 9:42 pm

    And Guan Eng…

  13. #14 by LittleBird on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 9:44 pm

    Wonder ..if anyone seen a chinese guy holding a hand written banner..talking about some injustice done to him, mentioning a case, .somewhere near Bukit Bintang or Raja Chulan..

  14. #15 by taikohtai on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 10:25 pm

    Now you all should know why the law in Malaysia is an ASS!
    No wonder the rakyat gets raped in every direction!

  15. #16 by LittleBird on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 10:26 pm

    But I find the video bit unbelievable. Didnt we have a Ruler Conference which decides on the appointment of Judges? how a could a lawyer and some businessman could dictate who could be appointed.

  16. #17 by citizen on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 10:46 pm

    I don’t think so LittleBird, the Conference of Rulers decides who becomes the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong and his deputy. Under our Constitution, it is the prime minister who decides on the appointment of judges.

  17. #18 by digard on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 10:48 pm



    Is this a comedy or April’s Fool? I can only hope so!

  18. #19 by UFOne on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 10:50 pm

    Don’t worry whether it is genuine or not. Someone who has been there knows what is actually going on. You don’t have to be inside to know whether it is real or not. Just look around you. We talk so much on cemerlang, gemilang and terbilang and we preach a lot on transparency, integrity, honesty, bla, bla, bla. We project to the world like we are on top of everything and we make it seem like we have everything under control. lol lol. Ask yourself. If you call yourself a Malaysian, ask yourself. Can things be improved ? May be for now you all think that things look okay. Hopefully the scales will fall off from your eyes. Not only will you see. But you will feel. Since we are so religious, remember we cannot make a fool out of God. Since we have been keeping our rituals, God will act. It is just a matter of time. Since we say we believe in God, then believe that one day He will act. Those in power who know how to use power correctly and those in power who know how to use power incorrectly will stand and give an account to God of what they all have done. This month is the holy month of Ramadan. God is more interested in your hearts rather than going through a ritual and yet the heart is not right. The month of Ramadan can be very interesting. It just exposes the hypocrisy of a human’s heart. Anyway, we have a very religious Prime Minister and he and we know that we are to fear God. Being the leader of the country, he has to remember that the day will come when he has to stand in the presence of God and gives an account of what he has done not only as a Prime Minister but also to the country. Did he make sure that his people are treated fairly ? Or did he just say it and not mean it ? Did he do all that he can in his power to make sure that his people are treated in a right manner and with dignity ? Anyway, hopefully our Prime Minister does not forget God and we pray that God will help our Prime Minister to do what is right. The month of Ramadan always remind us that we are to draw near to our spiritual force.

  19. #20 by citizen on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 10:56 pm

    I think this video alone will not be enough to do anything to them.

  20. #21 by trashed on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 - 11:22 pm

    I am no expert but the video looks genuine as the voice and lip movement seem to be in sync.

    As for the content, Lingham was seen holidaying with former CJ Eusoff Chin in the past so why not this new “relationship” ?

    It begs the question – is the Judiciary really impartial ?

  21. #22 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 2:45 am

    V.K. is a law graduate of the mid-80s whose rise to power and wealth is unmatched by any other – even by more senior lawyers. Acting in concert with certain judges he has been able to ‘win’ cases for his wealthy clients. In fact rumour has it that he even helped to write judgments for certain judges!

  22. #23 by achmedrauff on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 4:14 am

    First shot fired~! I would love to see the Domino effect from this.

    I have both the video and the press statement of the video in my blog

  23. #24 by trashed on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 5:29 am

    The late scribe, Mr MGG Pillai would have been vindicated at this revelation.

  24. #25 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 6:25 am

    Badawi could do the right thing by appointing a royal commission of enquiry, then put all the blame on Mahathir and his (Mahathir’s) cronies like Daim and Vincent Tan. Badawi could regain the moral high ground but he could lose support within UMNO because the current Majlis Tertinggi and cabinet is still littered with remnants of the previous administration.

    My conclusion is that this will be swept under the carpet like everything else in Bolehland. Video ? What video ? Must be a doctored video.

  25. #26 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 6:28 am

    I pray to God that Mahathir should live for many more years to see for himself the results of his social experiments that necessitated the corruption of the judiciary, the police force and the ACA.

    22 years of social experimentation and now the chickens have come home to roost.

  26. #27 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 8:30 am

    The video was made in 2004. This is 2007. Why was it not exposed earlier?

    Lots of people are in deep shit!

  27. #28 by Bigjoe on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 8:31 am

    This not only reveal how things are done in the Courts but the entire government itself. This is how UMNO-led government work.
    What does it look like? An elected Sultan sorrounded by parasites sucking the blood out of the nation…

  28. #29 by ktteokt on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 8:58 am

    What happened to the so-called “Separation of Powers”?

  29. #30 by sotong on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 9:04 am

    Imagine the number of people wrongly sentenced and criminals able to buy freedom with power and wealth.

    No wonder the country is so sick!

  30. #31 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 10:28 am

    What separation of what powers??

  31. #32 by Jonny on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 11:36 am

    Imagine, there were a lot of thump cards held by many people.

    This are the RED CARDS. Which can be dished out at appropriate time.

    Fact is, everything in Malaysia is tainted. Once a thump card is held out, one thing may lead to another. And indeed a domino effect.

    Hence, it is a well-calculated move to reveal it now.

    And the other party would counteract soon with more thump cards.

    More sandiwara to see. But the whole story ends … when everybody realize, everyone is as tainted as the next one who sits next to him.

    Eventually, all things get swept under the carpet again, a new equilibrium and compromise reached.

    More contracts exchange hands.


  32. #33 by sheriff singh on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 12:14 pm

    First the underground Triads appoints the Inspector General of Police and their top brass.

    Then we have the “boys” on the 4th floor who determines who gets what mega-contracts and favours.

    Now a “prominent” lawyer determines who gets to be the Chief Justice and who are to sit on the Court of Appeal and in the Federal Court to hear their cases.

    What’s next? Surprise me.

  33. #34 by badak on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 12:47 pm

    What is new ,You know ,I know every one knows that the UMNO lead gorverment is coruppted from the PM OFFICE right down to the office boys in every goverment,

    UMNO is always shouting that they are helping the Malays,What utter bullshit.Ask any Malays members of PAS and PKR can the get help from the gorverment,Ask any Malay members of PAS and PKR with F license did they get any work from the goverment.( Even getting the the license is an up hill task ).

    Why are the Malays so blind that they can,t see that they are being cheated by the top people of UMNO.The goverment should help all Malays even if they are in the opposition.

    I salute and have to thank all the MALAYS in the opposition .Because they know that the UMNO led goverment are just a bunch of coruppted bigots who robs the poor so that they can live a good life.

  34. #35 by helpless on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 2:06 pm

    My guess the answer from PM:

    Nak pecat dia…?? Dia pun macam saya, cuma nak hidup…cari..makan…

    Berdoalah sahaja semua hidup aman dan damai…….. semua hidup dengan aman…..Sikit.. sikit coruption… tak apa… membawa pembangunan…..

  35. #36 by Jamesy on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 2:44 pm


  36. #37 by grace on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 4:10 pm

    Yes, I really pity MGG Pillai. Now the truth is out. To the late MGG Pillai, may God bless your soul! The truth is really out!

  37. #38 by k1980 on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 4:23 pm

    This scandle may well end up the way of Vijendran’s sex video tape which was destroyed by the police to prevent it from being used as evidence

  38. #39 by grace on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 4:32 pm

    not to woryy. Once beaten twice shy. This time around the recording has been duplicated and is in the possesion of many parties.

  39. #40 by ihavesomethingtosay on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 6:54 pm

    Will this video be OSA-ed?

    Will this whistle blower be penalised?

    answer is that it probably will……………..

  40. #41 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 8:42 pm

    Here is a lawyer heard trying to smooth the kinks and ensure that only members of the judiciary ‘friendly to the PM’ (to put it mildly) would be placed in positions of power – in case it is not obvious to the rest of us.

    What is a lawyer doing in the first place being ‘friendly’ with members of the judiciary? Don’t they decide his cases in court?

    Instead of asking who is V.K. Lingam to them, the question that should be asked is who is Vincent Tan to Mahathir? The link then becomes obvious.

  41. #42 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 20 September 2007 - 8:44 pm

    Elsewhere this tape would have brought down the government! But then this is Malaysia!

  42. #43 by k1980 on Friday, 21 September 2007 - 12:06 am

    Who is Vincent Tan to Mahathir? If there can be a Patrick Badawi, then there also can be a Vincent Mahatir

  43. #44 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Friday, 21 September 2007 - 1:37 am

    This expose should be a tsunami for Malaysia.

    But then in Malaysia the PMs are demi-gods and all Malaysians are mere underlings crawling between their legs and smelling all the fart!

  44. #45 by negarawan on Friday, 21 September 2007 - 4:21 am

    There’s no prove that the person on the other line is Fairuz.

  45. #46 by undergrad2 on Friday, 21 September 2007 - 8:39 am

    Oh that is easy. Put V.K. Lingam on the witness stand and ask him.

  46. #47 by negarawan on Friday, 21 September 2007 - 11:26 pm

    That depends where the witness stand is. If it is in Malaysia, you might as well forget it. The court decision would have been made before any witness take the stand.

  47. #48 by counsel888 on Sunday, 12 October 2008 - 8:38 am

    Just when the dust had begun to settle on his previous and unfortunate misadventure, a naked attempt to throw Malaysia into chaos and seize government in the ensuring confusion, Anwar Ibrahim appears once more to have gravely miscalculated his moves, demonstrating a mercenary ‘the devil may care’ attitude in his unquenchable lust for power.

    If there is one thing that will forever characterize Anwar’s contribution to Malaysian history it is this. He will be remembered as the man who never failed to waste or squander an opportunity through his own vanity and his unwavering belief in his own infallibility and invincibility. Hitler too suffered from that same complex.

    The sheer audacity of Anwar’s putsch this time is only dwarfed by enormity of the arrogance of the man’s ignorance. Using an outdated apocryphal document he calls Video Korupsi Tun Datuk Fairuz dan VK Lingham, (“Video”) Anwar seeks to revive his faded jaded personal and his political reputation and leadership ambitions with a sensational policy free campaign.

    THE VIDEO (Video Korupsi Tun Datuk Fairuz dan VK Lingham)”

    What the Video is proof of is nothing more than a documentary footage of an Indian male, even if that Indian male is VK Lingham, engaged in a monologue over a telephone.

    To Anwar it purports to be a record of proof of an act of corruption in recording what he asserts is a private conversation between the Chief Justice of Malaysia and a lawyer (identified in the video as VK Lingham) conclusively therefore also proof of corruption against the judge and Lingham.

    There is no dialogue. We hear no one else. The Video is evidence of and proves nothing more than just that. Perhaps just a little more. That the Anwar camp has no regard for the privacy of individuals, nor regard for the law is evident in his actions nor is there any indication that Anwar understand the law or how it works.

    What surprises many around the world and yet seems oblivious to a sector of the Malaysian community, the Malaysian legal fraternity and their Human Rights Advocates (at least that’s what they prefer to be portrayed as) if that’s not stretching credibility too far, is the failure of these two groups to comment on, or to challenge this glaring defect in this egregious document, the Video in support Anwar’s claims of proof of corruption against the judiciary in Malaysia.


    *Like the word corruption, judicial misconduct and judicial misbehaviour has no universally defined meaning. Instead each of these terms can be applied selectively in any given set of circumstances.

    At its weakest, it is used to define a morally or socially unacceptable or questionable form of conduct to make it sound so reprehensible as to deserve legal sanction.

    It should be noted that regardless of the jurisdiction, a majority of jurists and politicians in common law countries would not be in favour of any statutory definition of what constitutes removable misbehaviour , misconduct, incapacity or what divides removable misbehaviour from non-removable misbehaviour in the case of judicial misconduct.

    However worthy such an endeavour might be in principle, it would seem to be a near impossible and impractical exercise due to the difficulties in identifying and defining the offence in this area.

    For example, there is widely held opinion amongst internationally renowned jurists and academics that the term misbehaviour or misconduct as far as judicial officers are concerned should be used in a way that meets the ordinary definition of those terms and should not to be restricted to misconduct in office or to conduct of a criminal nature.

    A considerable degree of leeway is thereby offered for debate and interpretation as to what constitutes misconduct and as to whether, in any particular case, it constitutes a “hanging offence”.

    It will be recalled that the Commissioners in the Lionel Murphy affair, (Lush, Blackburn and Wells) were to some degree in unison about notions such as

    • conduct judged by contemporary standards which casts doubt on a judge’s suitability to continue in office;
    • conduct which, being morally wrong, demonstrates the unfitness of the judge to continue; and
    • behaviour which represents a serious a departure from the standards of proper behaviour by the judge that it must be found to have destroyed public confidence in the judge.

    Perhaps the last of these categories as propounded by Lush, Blackburn and Wells is what Anwar was alluding to. But the manner in which he presented his case and his credentials as the future leader of Malaysia behind the veneer the tapes leads to more questions being asked about Anwar’s credibility, his capability and his character (his character is an issue when he attacks the character of his opponents).

    World renowned legal commentator and professor of law, Tony Blackshields of Macquarie university Australia, notes that in the Federal context, (applicable in the Anwar tapes question (my opinion)), “Misbehaviour is essentially a political rather than a legal notion”.

    It was further argued or submitted in the Lionel Murphy matter that the distinction between criminal and non-criminal behaviour is not necessarily going to be very helpful.

    For example, while a conviction for a lower or medium level drink driving offence or a minor assault may not be regarded as sufficient for the removal of a judicial officer, non-criminal behaviour such as persistent failure to produce timely judgments or repeated serious rudeness to litigants and/or lawyers could be.* ( *adapted from the Sallman Paper 2005)

    Anwar did not allude to any of these notions or suggestions but instead went on a whim to cling on to an outdated piece of questionable but sensational document suggesting a desperate action by a desperate man.

    On the face of repeated complaints where proof is readily available from the record and the bar, for persistent failure to produce timely judgments or repeated serious rudeness to litigants and/or lawyers for which there is ample proof, Anwar would have been better submitting these as examples of misconduct rather than a feeble sensational video to make his case then fall on his sword.


    If this is Anwar’s and Elizabeth Wong’s idea of proof of corruption (as opposed to inadmissible and uncorroborated evidence) and proof of the truth to their assertions, then that video unfortunately purporting to show Anwar’s good wife engaging in an intimate encounter with a white male in a hotel room, (an Australian or American journalist according to the commentary) a video which once did the rounds of the internet when Anwar was imprisoned, is by these same standards he now applies to Fairuz and Lingham, evidence of his wife’s infidelity and his party’s immorality if not by implication then at least expressly so. She was once their president.

    That video of Anwar’s wife (which it purports to be) which no one should condone for what damage it does to unsuspecting individuals in the exercise of their private rights, cannot be proved to contain anything factual or of public benefit without the benefit of an open trial and testing of that evidence. Such is an example of the dangers of cheap entertainment and an immoral stunt to defame being submitted as proof.

    Anyone who supports such a stunt without the benefit of a proper investigation, procedural fairness and conclusive proofs of the assertions made is equally at the very least morally culpable.


    Clearly Malaysian lawyers have a credibility problem if they do not unequivocally condemn Anwar’s pernicious theatrics. In remaining silent observers and indolent spectators on the sidelines in the face of such an unprecedented assault on the judiciary, the dignity of the office of the Chief Justice and the courts, they are guilty of a gross dereliction of their duty as officers of the courts.
    Politics and political biases should not interfere with such a duty.

    It is a duty they must discharge impartially as is expected of them. Lawyers by their training are expected to be forensic and detached, not partial and biased. The law cannot operate fairly in an environment where fairness, truth and merit are casualties whilst mediocrity and bias are the criteria for justice to prevail. This is an assault on the competence and integrity of the entire legal system which includes lawyers as its largest constituent component.

    Lawyers ought to know that it is for the courts (and that includes them as officers of the courts) to dispense justice rather than for an individual like Anwar to dispense with justice with their tacit support in pursuit of a purely personal and political objective.

    What’s also perhaps more disturbing in this affair is the lack of discussion or argument about those critical legal issues of evidence, probity, political and moral integrity that will eventually impact on all of us if Anwar gets his way with government which the Malaysian bar appears to have conveniently ignored with their silence.


    Consider the following proposition in the light of the position the Malaysian bar has adopted in this affair.

    The ultimate statutory sanction against a human being in Malaysia is the death penalty. It applies to persons who are found in unlawful and unlicensed possession of firearms as well and more notably it applies to persons in possession of drugs of dependence such as marijuana, cocaine or heroin.

    In the absence of the expected outrage on pressing legal issues raised by the Video, an outrage which has yet to manifest itself from the Malaysian bar, one can only wonder as to how many Malaysians who dangled on the end of a hangman’s noose paid that ultimate price for the incompetence or ignorance a Malaysian legal practitioner acting in their defense.

    This Video purporting to show VK Lingham engaging in a conversation with Chief Justice Fairuz is designed to bring the reputation and credibility of the bench and the courts of Malaysia into disrepute. Lawyers must remember that the bench is made up of persons from their esteemed ranks.

    Anwar’s actions in this particular instance constitutes the offence of contempt of court. A politically bankrupt exercise designed to smear individuals he does not like with his contumely against an elected government of the day through a cowardly act of the most sinister sort, has neither legal nor moral basis.

    Interference by breaching the privacy of an individual through use of untested perhaps even manufactured evidence which Anwar relies on in support of his vain belief that he is the only worthy contender for the office of Prime Minister of Malaysia, is reflective of the extent to which a delusional narcissistic Anwar will go in pursuit of his ambitions at the expense of others.

    Anwar demonstrates an embarrassing inability to distinguish fact from fiction, evidence from proof or a clear understanding of the law. Anwar demonstrates a level of culpability, recklessness and reinforces the fact he is clearly a man with little regard for the law or the constitution.

    A totalitarian blackmailer is more likely the character he proves himself to be in this unfortunate episode, having further gone on the record to make the claims that the judiciary is corrupt based on a suspect video and his discredited word.

    Some media like Malaysia Kini and the legal profession on the other hand willingly and irresponsibly assist Anwar to muster a misguided public in manufacturing consent.


    As a politician with a considerable degree and wealth of experience in the intimate workings of government and a long career of having dealt with the law and government at the highest levels, his smear and defamation of the bench is inexcusable, unforgivable, deliberate and without proper cause.

    If this were the rantings of an uneducated rural Malay, an Indian plantation labourer or a common Chinese Malaysian whom many believe have an in built anti Malay bent anyway, then the making and publishing of such defamatory material, labeling it so confidently as evidence of corruption could be tolerated and to some extent excused.

    However when presented so confidently as proof by someone of Anwar’s perceived caliber, his mischief is criminal, deliberate, seditious, treasonous, reckless and criminal.

    Here is an individual who so readily points the accusing finger of corruption, malice and inequity towards his colleagues, his partners in crime with whom he once shared a common goal, acting as a repository of the trust of Malaysians,.


    The obvious question on everyone’s lips is, how come Anwar remained so deafening silent when the ISA and all other forms of ‘undemocratic behaviour’ during his time in government was inflicted on so many? What makes Anwar so believable now? especially with his reckless and unlawful defamation of the office of the Chief Justice of Malaysia without reason cause or proof apart from his personal desire for revenge?.

    Anwar’s attempts to convince us his ‘road to Damascus conversion’ occurred sometime during the currency crises in 1997 and that he is now a changed man for the better is less than convincing in light of this unfortunate episode in his political life. The 16th of September has now come and gone. It is history like he is fast becoming himself.

    Where is the evidence if not the proof of Anwar’s sudden change? or is Anwar suggesting that the moment he left parliament for the last time everything went pear shaped and corrupt and therefore suddenly worthy of his contempt for the nation which gives him license to defame his opponents with impunity? Or is he perhaps suggesting something else to us, such as perhaps, he was himself complicit in that culture of corruption he suggests existed whilst he was in office, but that the real offence committed by the government of the day was that he was not placed in charge of the till?


    Except for his coterie of rabid fanatics, ignorant legal advisors and sycophantic admirers, it is hoped he will be made an example of for what he has now done by his reckless childish behaviour in thwarting any real opportunity by those committed to exposing real corruption and undemocratic behaviour wherever it occurs.
    Sadly Anwar has lost any semblance of credibility that may have existed within him as a residue of his last disastrous adventure, with this farcical, deliberate tarnishing of the reputations of either Fairuz or Lingham.

    Indelibly stamped across his feeble attempts to grab power again through anarchy is the clear absence of statesmanship. Brinkmanship maybe, but where is the cause or principle?
    If the judiciary is corrupt, then let due process prevail. The general suspicion is that too many within the legal profession themselves find this ‘expose’ too close for comfort which is why their silence is deafening.

    The more pressing problem is the question of whether members of the legal fraternity in Malaysia have the requisite skills or levels of competence to prosecute or bring a successful action against those they ‘suspect’ of corruption without revealing a tainted hand.

    Anwar has tarnished the image of Malaysia’s courts and its judicial institutions to an extent it can only be remedied by locking him up after an open trial and throwing away the key, bad back or otherwise.

    He deserves to be reminded that the quality of evidence he accused the Mahathir government of relying on at his trial, labeling it unfair, tainted, manufactured and inadmissible is now the very same quality of evidence he relies on to defame his targets. Anwar cried for procedural fairness during his trial. His recent actions demonstrate an acute lack of understanding of that concept.

    In his own words and by implication of what he conveyed at his recent press conference, Fairuz is in his cross hairs for revenge because Fairuz he claims was part of a ‘conspiracy’ to destroy him. That’s not good enough a reason to hold the nation and its political and legal institutions to ransom. Or is it fair game in pursuit of a larger political objective? Clearly the nation and its people are dispensable commodities where Anwar’s political ambitions are concerned.


    No conspiracy was needed to destroy Anwar except a conspiracy of truth, fact and the law. Considering Anwar’s demonstrated abject , unmitigated ignorance of politics and law and his contempt of the law, the judiciary or the liberties of individual citizens whether these be VK Lingham or Fairuz , Anwar needs no enemies to fail. He shoots himself well in the foot and is self destructive enough for others to let him engineer his own demise again. If Anwar does not take his foot out of his mouth soon he may well commit political suicide as well.

    Anwar reinforces the proofs and the truth behind his conviction for sodomy to the extent that, the standards of proof established at his trial was far higher than the standards of proof he is able to establish to prove the culpability of Fairuz and Lingham in the commission of such a grave offence as judicial corruption.
    For a politician having experienced both of the extreme examples of what the law may dish out to the unwary when abused, he still seems terribly ignorant, careless and quite clearly indifferent to the seriousness of his charges against his victims and appears clearly not to have learned his lesson.


    In legal proceedings it is generally accepted that there must be a subject matter for determination, and some immediate right, duty or liability to be ascertained by a court.

    In order to establish that there is a prima facie case (ignoring for the moment the magnitude of the offence complained of) due process and reference to established legal practice should be the first course of action.

    Anwar may like us to believe that he is being chivalrous by his behaviour. His actions though appear to belie a somewhat sinister, cavalier attitude and design for what is by his own admissions a campaign of retribution en route to his ultimate destination, the office of prime minister.

    Anwar appears to be totally naieve about the dangers of relying on video recordings (second hand hearsay ) ( a case of sex lies and videos or is it life imitating art?) purporting to show what is clearly uncorroborated ‘evidence’ of proofs that the events complained of occurred. This most unfortunate outburst by him will be the root cause of his downfall again.

    In such a vain attempt at grabing power through sensation and unsubstantiated, uncorroborated claims of corruption, it may be useful for Anwar to examine the reasons why courts in common law jurisdictions do not allow for the admission of these types of evidentiary material to be used against an accused save in exceptional circumstances and even then only where permitted by law.

    The law of evidence and the common law provides adequate studies of the dangers of second and third hand hearsay evidence against an accused especially if in uncorroborated documentary form.


    People may recall the popular animated film Babe. Babe is an Oscar winning film depicting a pig, ducks and other barn animals speaking effortlessly in English with flawless lip sync, seamless edits and the unmitigated use of computer graphics.

    The film cleverly uses animals in animation to reinforce a cryptic moral message so convincing to its audiences. It also provides the most compelling contemporary evidence of why the use of such material as the Video can be dangerous when presented as unimpeachable evidence of proof of his assertions.

    With the advent of computer film technology now available in “off the shelf” software to anyone desirous of creative or damaging mischief, anyone with half a brain can concoct what Anwar relies on for his very conclusive statements about the Judge and Lingham. That is not to suggest that Anwar concocted this Video. The point is that it is possible for someone with the necessary tools to create such a Video. The US continually uses it to discredit its enemies like Osama Bin Laden.


    If a pig could speak and a horse argue (which by the way many young Americans interviewed after the film said, they believed possible, citing the example of a parrot speaking human languages even if only by repetition) then surely Anwar’s base intelligence should have told him that applying the same medium to his mischief carrying his evidence as proof, it is also equally possible to produce the same result he now relies on in this tape he presents as proof of corruption.

    This is precisely the reason why competent courts do not and are under a duty not to admit such evidence without proper cogent corroborative supporting proofs.


    For Anwar to stoop so low is final reinforcement of the dangers of ever having him in parliament let alone as a future Prime Minister of Malaysia. He cannot be trusted to distinguish fact from fiction, he has very poor choice of legal advisors and has now been dragged into a final act of self destruction through political suicide driven by desperation of his own incompetence and ambition. (foot in mouth disease).

    If he were ill advised into this perfidious act against his nation, he has a duty to at least to dismiss his entire legal team and his political advisors immediately he discovers the futility of pursuing this stunt with its dire criminal implications for him. It has far reaching consequences for his personal and professional reputation and whatever may be left of his political integrity.

    Anwar demonstrates a characteristic beneath contempt for what he has done or attempted to do to Lingham and to Fairuz regardless of what one may perceive of both these individuals privately. He demonstrates a terribly immature and unstable personality devoid of the statesmanship qualities one would expect of a would be political leader.

    It is widely hoped that he will contain his vanity, uncontrollable anger and desire for revenge in order to re establish his credentials and redeem himself once again to convince that he is what Malaysia needs (like a hole in the head at this time).

    In parting, someone should perhaps introduce Anwar to this verse:

    “The heights to which great men have leapt were not achieved in sudden flight. But they whilst their companions slept were toiling upward in the night”

    Harvard and George Washington University may also for their part wish to take time out for some introspection. Their hasty willingness to bolster their jaded reputations with the hype associated with awarding unmeritorious honorary professorships and doctorates to people like Anwar and others for purely politically expedient reasons will only enhance their reputations. Bad reputations that is.

    Gopal Raj Kumar

You must be logged in to post a comment.