Archive for January 26th, 2008

Do we need a RCI on RCI on Lingam Tape to restore confidence in judiciary?

The second-week proceedings of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into the Lingam Tape has delivered three body blows undermining the commission’s public credibility as an independent and fearless agency to restore national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the Malaysian judiciary.

The first blow stems from the continued testimony of senior lawyer V. K.Lingam, coming on the heels of former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and former Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin, turning the Royal Commission of Inquiry into a public circus to the extent that a Malaysian quiz could be created to ask who had respectively been responsible for the following unforgettable words:

“Correct, correct, correct”;

“No, No, No”;

“Coincidence, coincidence, coincidence”; and

“Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit”.

Malaysians are astounded as to how the Royal Commission of Inquiry had allowed the “star witness” of the “it looks like me, it sounds like me but I will not say 100% that it’s me” quote to turn it into a circus – reflecting adversely not just on Lingam but even more seriously, on all the five Commissioners.

The language used by Lingam in his testimony at the RCI on Lingam Tape was unprecedentedly offensive in any court or public hearing – and which would have been disallowed as “unparliamentary” in Parliament. In fact, the language used was so unprintable for polite society that two leading dailies had to use asterisks for part of the word instead of printing it in full! Read the rest of this entry »


If Anwar not a factor, why Abdullah cannot wait less than 2 months for next general election?

“Tell it to the marines” – that will be the common response to the statement by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in CNN’s World News Asia telecast live from Davos, Switzerland yesterday that former deputy prime minister, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was not a factor in his decision on the timing of the next general election. (“Telling it to the marines” is the scornful response to a tall and unbelieved story/claim.)

Asserting that he was not pre-empting the former deputy prime minister from contesting the general election, Abdullah said:

“There are other factors in my mind that I have to think about before I recommend the dissolution of parliament and fix the date for the elections.”

If Anwar is not a factor in his calculations for the next polls, Abdullah should explain why he cannot wait less than two months to allow the former DPM to contest in the 12th general election?

Is it because Abdullah has been advised by his strategists and the Putrajaya fourth-storey advisers that the electoral prospects for the Barisan Nasional can only get worse and not better, especially if Anwar is allowed to participate personally in the hustings as a candidate?

The latest opinion poll should be a “shocker” for Abdullah and the Barisan Nasional leaders, as it found that the Prime Minister’s approval rating has hit a personal low, slipping from a high of 91 per cent when he took power in late 2003 to 61 per cent in December last month, the lowest since he took office in late 2003 and down by 10 percentage points from November. Read the rest of this entry »


Will Ong Ka Ting review the PHFSA?

by RS

With reference to media reports of a doctor being convicted for not registering his clinic, (Jan 19th 2008), it is incomprehensible that this registered doctor was fined a whopping RM120,000 for not registering his clinic. And since he couldn’t come up with the fine, he was sent off to serve a three month jail term at Kajang Prison.

In April of last year the DG of Health, asserted that the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998 (PHFSA) was enacted to direct private hospitals to carry out their social responsibilities and was not meant to be punitive or detrimental in nature.

He and the previous Health Minister, Chua Soi Lek, further assured the medical community that since the Act was outdated, changes would be made and ratified by the Attorney-General’s chambers.

These changes have yet to be agreed upon or ratified but the Act has already been applied leading now to a doctor being convicted on a technicality.

Will the DG now tell the judge, that she should not have passed this type of sentence? Of course not, because that is not how the law works once an Act is passed. Read the rest of this entry »