I will move a substantive motion of no confidence in Tan Sri Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim as Chief Justice when Parliament reconvenes on Oct. 22 if the Prime Minister and Cabinet evade their national duty tomorrow to restore national and international confidence in the independence and integrity of Malaysian judiciary and establish a Royal Commission of Inquiry.
The urgency of such a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the independence and integrity of the Malaysian judiciary has been highlighted by the current controversy and public furore over the Lingam Tape scandal re-opening one of the most disgraceful subjects in Malaysia — the 19-year crisis of confidence in the Malaysian judiciary with the system of justice tottering from one scandal after another in the past two decades since 1988.
Public opinion have spoken out loud and clear that Malaysia must not miss the golden opportunity which has surfaced to rectify one of the greatest national shames and injustices in five decades of Malaysian nationhood — the plunge in national and international confidence in the Malaysian judiciary in the past 19 years from the high world esteem and respect it had enjoyed during the first three decades of Malaysian history, especially under the first three Prime Ministership of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein.
The Cabinet tomorrow must not abdicate from its national duty to do what is right for the country and future generations — to make Malaysians proud of the Malaysian judiciary and system of justice once again after 19 years by disbanding the three-man panel on the authenticity of Lingam Tape and its replacement by a Royal Commission of Inquiry with wide-ranging powers to inquire into the rot in the justice system to restore national and international confidence in the Malaysian judiciary.
On Sunday, three illustrious former members of the Bench had added their voices to the snowballing demand for a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the system of justice as well as for a Judicial Appointment Commission.
The three retired judges — rightly described by Sunday Star as “among the most highly-respected to have served on the Bench – who have spoken up are retired Court of Appeal judges, Datuk Shaik Daud Ismail, Datuk K.C. Vohrah and Datuk V.C. George.
Shaik Daud made a most powerful argument for a Judicial Appointments Commission when he pointed out the blemishes of recent judicial appointments: “We have seen so many cases where seniors (judges) with merit are not promoted but juniors without merit are. The reason would appear to be that they are being rewarded.”
On the need for a Royal Commission of Inquiry instead of just a panel to look into the authenticity of Lingam Tape, George said: “The panel is only looking at one issue. I think the Bar is on the right track in calling for a royal commission to look into all aspects of the judiciary” while Vohrah said: “Yes. A royal commission could explore all aspects of the ills besetting the judiciary. The problems are far-reaching and something has to be done fairly quickly before the judiciary slides further down the track.”
On Nazri’s claim that everything was all right with the judiciary, Vohrah had this unflattering comment:
“I think he’s probably not aware of what is happening on the ground. In many commercial contracts, parties are including an arbitration clause to resolve disputes instead of the courts. That is a terrible blow to the judiciary because apart from a handful, the rest are good judges. In some states, there may be three or four judges but you will find that only one or two are doing all the work and carrying the whole burden.”
If the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and the Cabinet are not prepared to do their national duty to restore national and international confidence in the judiciary at the Cabinet meeting tomorrow by establishing a Royal Commission of Inquiry, then there is probably no other option than to explore the next logical move in Parliament — a substantive motion of no confidence in Ahmad Fairuz as Chief Justice.
This is because there are ample grounds to impeach Ahmad Fairuz for judicial misconduct and failings as Chief Justice, including:
- Failure to honour his public undertaking when he first became Chief Justice more than four years ago to recast the Judges’ Code of Ethics 1994 to restore public confidence in judicial independence, impartiality and integrity.
- Publicly tarnishing the image of the judiciary by failing to take action and substantiate grave charges which he made against judges for accepting bribes.
- Failure to take action against judges, including from the Federal Court, who had obstructed the course of justice in not writing up judgments — with one case of a Federal Court judge who had a backlog of some 35 outstanding judgments since his High Court appointment.
- His call for the abolition of the common law system and its replacement by Islamic law system.
- The seven-month constitutional deadlock over the appointment of a suitable Chief Judge of Malaya after the retirement of Tan Sri Siti Normah Yaakob on January 5, 2007.
- The Lingam Videotape scandal implicating him in an expose on the perversion of the course of justice involving the fixing of judicial appointments and the fixing of court decisions and judgments.
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz has said that the conduct of judges cannot be debated in Parliament. He is wrong. There is noting in the Parliamentary standing orders or the Constitution preventing judicial misconducts from coming under the scrutiny and debate in Parliament except that it must be by way of a substantive motion which has to comply with a special procedure.
If the Cabinet tomorrow fails to establish a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the rot in the system of justice in the past 19 years, I will set in motion the special procedure for the parliamentary scrutiny and debate of judicial misconduct in Parliament at the resumption of parliamentary meeting on Oct. 22.
I call on MPs regardless of whether from the Barisan Nasional or Opposition, to support a special debate in Parliament to restore national and international confidence in the judiciary by supporting the impeachment of Tan Sri Ahmad Fairuz as Chief Justice on the floor of Parliament.
(Media Conference in Sandakan on 2.10.07)
#1 by Bigjoe on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 8:50 am
Indeed, this movement is long overdue and should be maintained but its not a simple issue.
In US schools, elementary schools are thought ideas like the principle of independence of branches of government in social studies and history. I have yet to see the idea even in university text here. That rot was set long time ago when Razak took over the Ministry of Education.
Now there is no hope of our society believing in such principles because we have not lived it at all. Those who are older are uneducated of the the idea, those who are educated have not lived it except for the rare few and most of them too apathetic to take up the issue.
This is where the lawyers failed to take into account in 1988 and now I wonder now, despite being inspired, how far they are willing to pay the price to push the issue. Are they equal to Pakistan lawyers and Burmese monks….????
#2 by Libra2 on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 8:55 am
As always parochial interest will come to the fore and the Speaker will say “since an independent inquiry is in progress” the matter is not urgent.
As usual BN MPs will object as usual. They are a hopeless lot.
#3 by Jimm on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 9:29 am
There are cracks in the vault wall of BN OSA/ISA secrets.
Anyway, they are usually very daring enough to come out with more ‘statements’ and higher authorities decision to ‘covered’ to truth.
They have taken over control of the Parliament and everything are under they control.
#4 by Godfather on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 9:42 am
These thieves are so thick-skinned they will all pretend that this nothing more than a storm in a teacup. After all, the Speaker has said so many times before that motions on this topic were “not urgent” so we should not expect anything to come out of this new motion.
We can’t expect the MCA or the MIC or Gerakan to understand that the fundamental liberties and rights of the next few generations are at stake here. What matters to these myopic parties is simply how much of the crumbs they are getting now from UMNO, and to hell with the future.
#5 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 9:48 am
Frankly, matters have reached a stage where’s there’s no other way.
The appointment of Tan Sri Haider Mohd Noor to be chairman of the 3 man committee to enquire into authenticity of the clip is a grave mistake as it will not convince the public of the committee’s independence of the executive.
[In the so-called judicial crisis of 1988, Haidar, then Chief Registrar of Supreme Court, sided with Tun Hamid Omar (backed by TDM) against Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman and 4 other Supreme Court Judges instructions to convene the Supreme Court hearing of Tun Salleh Abas’s application against his sacking. Instead of carrying out his duty as chief registrar to comply with the Order of the Supreme Court, Haidar preferred to comply with the administrative instructions of the Acting Lord President Hamid to ensure that the Court staff and the Court room would not be available to the five Supreme court Judges and that the Supreme Court seal be kept under lock and key].
In light of such a role in the judicial crisis Haidar’s very appointment to the 3 man committee as chairman would in public eyes negate any pretension to independence that the committee might otherwise have.
It will be obvious that, in the premises, the 3 man committee would be a “non starter†and the fact that it is so by reason of Executive decision would in turn reinforce public suspicion of Executive interference in regards to judiciary which in turn underscores the necessity for the establishment of a Judicial Commission for appointment of judges.
Against this backdrop, your moving of a substantive motion of no confidence against CJ in a Parliament is an excellent way of keeping gravity of the problem of judicial crisis within public focus and applying at the same time pressure on the government replace tyhe 3 man committee by a Royal Commission for investigation of the Lingam clip/tape and the establishment of a Judicial Commission for judges’ appointment.
Unfortunately, we will have to admit that such a substantive motion of no confidence will not be carried – not only because the BN MPs who are majority in parliament are bound by party whip to vote against it – but also principally because one cannot pass a no confidence vote against Tan Sri Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim as Chief Justice when the question of what body it is, which is appropriate to investigate the clip/video tape – whether 3 men committee or Royal commission – has not yet been settled, much less having deliberated and concluded its findings in a way implicating the current CJ.
This (involvement ion Lingam’s tape) is the crucial lynchpin of such a motion rather than peripheral grounds of his failure to honour his public undertaking recast the Judges’ Code of Ethics 1994, failing to take action against judges not writing judgments or allegedly taking bribes (which have yet to be proven) or calling for the abolition of the common law system and its replacement by Islamic law system (it was just his opinion in an academic forum) or delay to appoint a substitute to replace Tan Sri Siti Normah Yaakob (that may be attributed to the Rulers not agreeing to the suggested substitute).
#6 by sotong on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 10:06 am
Those who undermined the integrity of the judiciary and placed the country at great shame and risk must be brought to justice immediately.
Leader/s must restore full confidence in the legal system before further irreversal damage is done to the country.
#7 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 10:08 am
I can understand why lawyers march to the Palace of Justice in support of independence of judiciary. It affects the work especially that of the litigation lawyer. Imagine a good and hardworking lawyer, after all his reserach into the cases, tells his client that he has a good case on facts and law and when the hearing comes he loses the case because the opponent lawyer or client has a thing going on with the judge. Worse still, where there’s corruption higher up, the downline and lower rung court staff will take the cue and become bankrupt. The other side sued, if he cannot afford a lawyer fee, can still afford a small bribe of say (RM500) to the court clerk to lose the judge’s file everytime the hearing is scheduled, whicvh practically means the case will never be heard for the next 10 years! An incompetent lawyer who loses his case due to lack of preparation will be able to shove the balme to the court system – that the judge favoured the other side for reasons extraneous to merits of his case. Meanwhile other lawyers whose mainstay is drafting agreements will keep on inserting arbitration clauses in the agreement so that if there’s dispute it will be referred to arbibration than the courts and the vagaries of their decisions. The lawyers specialising in arbitration will be prosperous – and so will be other lawyers whose expertise, well horned by commercial sense and experience, could craft and structure commercial agreements for their clients in a way that, with the right balance of carrot and stick, will prove a disincentive for the other side to breach the agreements or seek recourse from the courts, thereby again hitting at the rice bowls of the lawyers whose main practice is litigation based. Now as far as foreign investors are concerned, they’d think they better give this place a skip unless they have a link and pointman (which includes also a lawyer) under their pay role who holds claim of having access to seek the judge’s favour. See where the chips stand or fall in this game? :)
#8 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 10:10 am
Sorry Typo – “the downline and lower rung court staff will take the cue and become morally bankrupt/corrupt as well”.
#9 by RealWorld on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 10:19 am
“These thieves are so thick-skinned they will all pretend that this nothing more than a storm in a teacup.” – Godfather
Pot calling the kettle black thingy here, dude.
Dude, when you insulted the religion of another, you were pretty ‘thick skinned’ yourself, brushing your insults on another religion as nothing more than a storm in a teacup.
#10 by Godfather on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 10:57 am
“We are not in the business of cheating the people.” Leader of Islam Hadhari, 2006. If he wasn’t lying, he must have been talking in his sleep.
Kita ada HAD, kita mesti ada HARI.
#11 by RealWorld on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 11:25 am
Point proven!
#12 by HJ Angus on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 11:29 am
This is a good move to keep the issue alive though don’t think the MPs will sokong.
If you are NOT inclined to write any comments, please take the poll on my site that asks the question,
“What is Your Reaction to the Video on the Judges Scandal?”
http://malaysiawatch3.blogs…
The results are interesting too.
#13 by k1980 on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 12:13 pm
The latest Tamil box office hit: The dog biting the paw of the baboon which fed it 22 years ago
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/newsncom.php?itemid=8744
Excerpts from the letter dated April 12, 1985 written by Kayveas read: “Mere words cannot express how I feel about the prompt response you personally undertook. I am glad there is an MIC and I am even more glad that you are the president. I wish you all the best and may you remain in office for a lifetime.â€Â
#14 by Jimm on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 12:18 pm
The entire group that involved in this BNwatergate have found out that it’s not an easy task to keep the whole secret for long.
One thing puzzle us is they always come back to try a second time on each success attempts.
Everyone in the group owes at least one of the team member a big favor.
In this case, they have lost count their owings and credits.
#15 by Anti_NEP on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 12:27 pm
Motion denied!!! That taxi minister will shout loudly there is no scandal or crisis in the judiciary. Only the opposition is stirring up the issue to gain political milleage. The parliment Speaker will say motion not allow as this is of no public interset and urgency. The ‘independent committee’ already investigating the tape and lets wait for the outcome of the investigation. Bolehland Boleh!!!
#16 by rfbu on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 12:47 pm
hahaha… i bet our neighbours up north, east, west and south are having a good laugh at us
of course this panel is just a way for the G to delay things… I bet they all very embarass… but must put up a front la… think of investor confidence
the world’s a stage and we are all actors…
#17 by waterman on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 1:39 pm
I remembered our foreign minister said in that HARD TALK interview “if one investor out of 10 is not happy with us then he is entitled to his own opinion”
Now the same line is coming from our law minister “I have been informed there are 13,000 registered members of the Bar, and 1,000 protesting lawyers is hardly a majority and compared with the 10,000,000 voters, it is a drop in the ocean.”
http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/11458/2/
In his eyes, a thousand lawyers on the march means there are 12000 more who are against the march, so hardly any course for concern.PM & DPM are happy with the current judicial settings.Period! Bar council, your memos are now in the drain!
This is the mindset of our government, if you don’t like it, you can …..
YB uncle Lim, I’m afraid your motion will not survive more than 3 seconds in that house.
I just can’t help but feel an enormous sense of helplessness here.
God please hear the cry of your people. Amen!
#18 by kanthanboy on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 1:43 pm
YB LKS, keep up the pressure to keep this matter alive. Do not allow this scandal to enter into Lingam Tape fatigue. For sure the Speaker will disallow your motion on the ground that the matter is being investigated by the 3-men penal. This time around you will see many BN’s MPs close both eyes instead of one.
Don’t give up. Already there are retired judges stand out to support a Royal Commission of Inquiry. More and more fairminded Malaysian will come forward to stand on the right side of history.
#19 by Bigjoe on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 1:45 pm
All along what has surprised me over this thing is that Najib is taking the lead over the matter while the PM found it fit to go to UN to talk about climate change and sermon about world conflicts, when he knows little (about the former) and we have failed miserably (glaringly in Myanmar).
I say lets just throw in a vote of no confidence on the PM for the handling of this affair in the first place.
#20 by waterman on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 2:09 pm
The 3-men panel will work laborously to cast doubts on the authenticity of the tape with the full weight of the ACA & supports from other G’s machineries.(That’s how much confidence I have in them).
Then the tide will turn against all oppositions for cooking up some silly pre election stories to cheat on the electorates.Then the rest of the saga you konw.
#21 by MY VIEW on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 2:33 pm
Why should you do the dirty job all the time?
#22 by sotong on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 2:38 pm
Decades of bad leadership and governance of the country with narrow and damaging politics had eroded the great institutions of the country with permanent, long term and far reaching consequences.
Misguided pride and arrogance were the sole motivation with little leadership of responsibility, accountability and competency.
#23 by Cinapek on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 3:11 pm
“I have been informed there are 13,000 registered members of the Bar, and 1,000 protesting lawyers is hardly a majority and compared with the 10,000,000 voters, it is a drop in the ocean.â€Â
1000 lawyers walked and already the FRU is out in full force with water cannons and armed to the teeth. If 13000 lawyers had walked, Nazri would have called out the Army, Navy and the Air Force and do a Myanmar Junta style crackdown on the walk.
By the way, Nazri, did you see 10,000,000 voters marching on Merdeka day?
#24 by RealWorld on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 3:27 pm
91% mandate, remember???
At the end of the day, its the majority who swings it. Not that 2000 who took part in that morning stroll.
#25 by Godfather on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 3:41 pm
CEMERLANG, GEMILANG, TEMBERANG.
#26 by RealWorld on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 3:57 pm
“CEMERLANG, GEMILANG, TEMBERANG.” – Godfather
Name calling.
Petty insults.
Insulting the religion of another.
Trademark of the Opposition.
#27 by RealWorld on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 4:10 pm
Godfather, get a grip mate. There is just so much penned up anger and frustration in you. You need to get out a bit more, dude. I can see you being locked up in that cell, heavily sedated with a comfort blanket and having a nice big strong male physchiatric nurse bringing you tea whilst patting you on the head and cooing gently did you more harm than good.
Maybe we need to reform our mental asylums as well.
#28 by waterman on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 4:35 pm
Oh la la la la !
After 50 years of independence we have only finally mutured to clean up our public toilets.
http://bright-i.blogspot.com/2007/10/dirty-toilets.html
As for the other matters, please come back in another 50 years. In our country we do things “our way” remember?
#29 by RealWorld on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 4:39 pm
“After 50 years of independence we have only finally mutured to clean up our public toilets.” – waterman
After 50 years, kita masih “mutured” lagi.
#30 by Godfather on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 5:06 pm
When you want to steal, at least steal in style. That’s the UMNO way. Kalah tak ape, gaya mesti mau. Then after stealing, retreat to the the tempurung.
#31 by Godfather on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 5:15 pm
“We are not in the business of cheating the people.” Sleeping Beauty in a fit of inspiration in 2006. Itu baru ade style, ade gaya. Tak ade substance, tapi tak ape lah. Ade Had, mesti ade Hari.
#32 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 7:05 pm
You guys still don’t get it!
The 3-man independent panel’s role is to whitewash the image of the judiciary long tainted by corruption. The proposed Royal Commission of Inquiry is to investigate the state of the Judiciary and to make recommendations to re-store the confidence the public once had should that be found wanting.
#33 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 7:14 pm
“I have been informed there are 13,000 registered members of the Bar, and 1,000 protesting lawyers is hardly a majority …†Law Minister
Now who could blame him?? He’s right!
There are 13,000 practicing lawyers, members of the Bar Council. Where were they on the day? The lawyers are unable to even agree about the fixing of senior judicial appointments within the Judiciary long suspected – and what’s more involving one of their own senior members!
Pathetic!
#34 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 7:17 pm
Mahathir was the first PM who was a non-lawyer.He has no respect for lawyers. He showed utter disgust for them. Could he be right about them??
#35 by straight talk on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 8:31 pm
sdr Lim, I applaud you for being consistent in your desire to see a Malaysia that is united not by colour of skin or religious affiliation but because we are born in this country as Malaysians. I share the view of Farish that we should think Malaysian first before anything else. Forget about Nazri’s comment. Can’t discuss about judiciary in Parliament but he is the minister for the judges.. accountable to none…
I pray that you have success in your substantive motion
#36 by sheriff singh on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 8:33 pm
Crisis? What crisis? (Nazri).
Well, because of the lack of a “crisis”, a “panel” will do, but only to find out whether the tape is authentic. Given the usual delaying tactics, Mr Fairuz will retire gracefully without fault in a month or two. Then it will be a non-issue and it will then be a non-issue.
The Speaker is there to ensure no embarassment for the government. He’s gonna say “its specific, of public interest but not urgent”, or some variation of this usual statement.
If elections, as some say, is going to be held in November, then everything will be buried.
But try la. It has to be done. Good luck.
#37 by LittleBird on Tuesday, 2 October 2007 - 10:12 pm
Also see http://malaysianjudges.blogspot.com/
#38 by Old.observer on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 - 1:09 am
Waterman,
Thanks for the article from “the Malaysian Bar”. (http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/11458/2/)
For the benefit of everyone here, allow me to quote Nazri here again, in his letter published in the Star, as this phrase hasn’t been touched upon here yet:
“Lawyers took to the streets to ask the executive to interfere in the judiciary. They were asking the Prime Minister to take action against the CJ.”
Really?? Did The Malaysian Bar ask the PM to take action against the CJ? Or did the Malaysian Bar ask the PM to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to INVESTIGATE?
If the CJ is clean, how did Nazri came to the conclusion that a Royal Commission of Inquiry will result in the PM taking action against the CJ???
Three points:
1. I am amazed that Nazri’s “guilty conscience” speaks so loud in this Star article.
2. I am even more amazed that Nazri can so blatantly misrepresent the facts so publicly without fear. This is the Star newspaper for god sake! What are the Malaysian Bar doing to clarify?
3. Nazri’s final comments – “Let us wait for the people to decide in the coming general election.” This is what I mean – if the Rakyat keeps voting BN in the coming GE, don’t expect the BN-putras to suddenly stop their corruption and lying activities. Instead, this will spur them further to go for bigger size corruptions, and bigger public lies.
I urge everyone here – don’t just vote for the Opposition in this coming GE. Tell your friends and family the truth about BN lies and corruptions – the list is long and many. Ask them why do they continue to vote for BN when this is just license for BN to rape the nation again, and again, and again, and in an increasingly worse manner … Do we want our children and grandchildren to continue to be victims of the BN-putras? Where is our nation’s conscience?
Old Observer
#39 by Bigjoe on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 - 9:06 am
We all know the no confidence vote will be defeated, probably not even allowed to be put to the vote. So what after that?
Are we going to down the same path as the Lina Joy case with lots of talk and nothing else?
We all know the difficulties of raising such a big important issue, its fundamentally just about power.
The only way to move this forward is to make sure the message is sent loud and clear to the PM that it could affect confidence in him, not the parliament, not Nazri, not anyone else. He is the Sultan in reality and the bucks stops with him…
#40 by RealWorld on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 - 10:04 am
“Itu baru ade style, ade gaya. Tak ade substance, tapi tak ape lah. Ade Had, mesti ade Hari.” – Godfather
Menang tak le. Bilo kalo maki agame oren pulak.
#41 by AnakTiriMalaysia on Thursday, 4 October 2007 - 6:54 pm
>>>># RealWorld Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 15: 57.27
“CEMERLANG, GEMILANG, TEMBERANG.†– Godfather
Name calling.
Petty insults.
Insulting the religion of another.’
#42 by 1eyecls on Thursday, 4 October 2007 - 11:39 pm
but the CJ a.k.a. car jokey will retire end of this month,or before that ,is gvn a TUN,then who else can touch him?
the rakyat have seen how the ruling party manipulating all the odd things against them,so ,we know what we should do this coming GE!
#43 by AnakTiriMalaysia on Thursday, 4 October 2007 - 11:43 pm
`RealWorld Says:Insulting the religion of another.’
It is the follower of the religion himself INSULT HIS OWN RELIGION MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE
when he support a corrupt government, ABUSING OF POWER, DISCRIMINATE FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS, KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE IN THE NAME OF god/JIHAD
#44 by cheeyong on Friday, 5 October 2007 - 2:00 am
RealWorld those lawyers I believe earn better, speak better, and much better in alot of things compare to you. From the way how you deduce situations, I suspect you’re some budak belum akil baligh that try to be an adult. So my advise to you, if you’re really an adult, you have alot of catching up to do in terms of maturity.
#45 by RealWorld on Friday, 5 October 2007 - 10:19 am
cheeyong, from your personal attacks, if you say that you are an adult and educated then I am indeed happy for you.
However, I will not reduce myself to throwing petty insults back at you.
Thnk you very much. :)
#46 by cheeyong on Friday, 5 October 2007 - 8:07 pm
RealWorld, a tit for tat. Your childish comments are indeed more vicious if not personal. So still I suspect you’re an immature person. Again grow up boy. You have much to learn.