This entry was posted on Thursday, 14 February 2008, 7:27 pm and is filed under Corruption, Judiciary. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
#1 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 8:32 pm
A small question.
Why should we depend on the subpoena? Why can’t Anwar’s lawyer for example, offer Tuan Syed Ahmad Idid as a witness. Make him available to the Commission. Syed Ahmad could be just outside the court door waiting to be called should the Commission see fit to do so?
That would put pressure on the Commission. Here is a material witness who has voluntarily come to testify, believing that he is under a duty to king and country to do so!
#3 by gofortruth on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:04 pm
Thank you uncle Lim our Malaysia Father of Democracy.
Great stuff! All very clear & precise to the point. A bit too long, 4min will be perfect. End with a powerful challenge for CHANGE for a better Malaysia.
TOGETHER WE CAN CHANGE IT!
What about –
1) PKFZ4.6B
2) The fighter jets
3) The submarines
4) The Mongolian C4
5) The AG audit report
6) Rising Crimes
7) Falling Education Standards
8) Why two 10 million Rm funds for Chinese school only announced so close to general election? Bribery ah?
Why only 20 millions Rm for the education of millions of Chinese when we could afford to spend 100million Rm & bought a space ticket for the travel of just one man.
9) etc etc
God bless Malaysia!
#4 by boomingray on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:35 pm
during the TDM ‘s era,ppl thought that he was irreplaceable,that’s why he was given a very long period of mandate,inspite the mb,mp,pdrm,aca,even the judiciary also join the ‘ban-wagon ‘toward corruptions!
we are what we did,blame ourselves!Singapore is truely an exception,mainly due to steady and solid payroll system for the govt. servants and most importantly,they practise meritocracy,not stupidity and crazy NEP!
#5 by waterfrontcoolie on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:41 pm
Dear All, by now we should all realize that all MEGA projects have only ONE OBJECTIVE: i.e. to enrich the Minister of the Ministry that under take the job! Period. Based on the so-called NEGOTIATED TENDER, the viability of the project is of no concern to the GOMEN. Failure means the next Minister will have one more round! Simple as that.
All that is left for ALL right thinking Malaysians to do now is to go to the BOOTHS to cast your votes! Of course, you know what to do. By the way, don’t ever hope the West would be bothered to promote ‘clean’ GOMEN, they are only interested to ensure non-Westerners failed miserably, so that they can come to create more problems. Only Malaysians can decide their own fate.
#10 by damianyeow on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 1:53 am
Sigh…..This Lingam Tape scandal, as in Rahim Thamby Chik scandal, Vijendran Porno & Altantuya cases will just drag on & on & on, until when the public conveniently forgets, then “tutup case, bahan bukti hilang” M’sia Boleh mah, BN Boleh, UMNO Boleh, Bodowi Boleh, Samy-Idiot Boleh, Boleh Apa, Boleh Tipu… rakyat percaya. so Siapa Bodoh?
#11 by Jeffrey on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 6:31 am
Are we sure ex judge Dato’ Syed Ahmad Idid who is the Director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration, would still, at this moment and time, want to “rock the establisment boat” to testify about maters relating to his 112 allegations of judicial corruption and ensuing forced resignation more than a decade ago?
#13 by Bigjoe on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 7:23 am
There is no choice now. Bar Council must organize a mass rally to protest. They must go to the PM now and get him to promise a full independent RCI on the entire judiciary otherwise, they should organise a mass rally best even before the election is done.
A protest during the election would kill it and damage this government because they would have to call off the election and postphone what are painful decisions that have been accumulating for months if not years. It may mean emergency rule but at the very least kill the legitimacy of Badawi’s administration which will lead to his eventual downfall.
This country cannot avoid a cathartic change, its best to get it done as soon as possible. Badawi view that it will take 30 years to reform essentially is none. Its sweeping things under the carpet with the hope that somehow the future will take care of itself. Its irresponsible, unjust and dangerous.
#14 by Bigjoe on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 7:36 am
There is another reason why I think this mass rally should happen during the election.
For the last two days, I have watched the announcement on the election both by the PM and SPR’s Tan Sri Rashid. The arrogance in their voice sickens me. Even the PM is arrogant because he think the Malay votes are behind him.
The PM of Malaysia is for all Malaysian because of founders thought that this country have no future as a monolithic entity. If the other races don’t vote for it, it don’t matter if he has 100% of the Malay vote. If overwhelming majority of other races don’t vote for BN, it kills the legitimacy of BN. It kills the very basis of our nation-hood and thereby nothing else matters, not the constitution, the rule of law, institutions etc everything the hegemonist have been building up.
That is what Chinese masses don’t get, you can’t have a very angry 30% of the population. Hell its not even legitimate to have an angry 8% of the population. Majority rule does not mean minority rights can be ignored.
The last two days, I feel they have certaintly forgot that.
#15 by undergrad2 on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 8:00 am
“They must go to the PM now and get him to promise a full independent RCI on the entire judiciary …” Bigjoe
The present proceedings to determine the authenticity of the Lingam tape should expose enough of what went on so the issue of corruption in high places within the judiciary could be investigated. A mass rally involving lawyers now would not look good as lawyers are also officers of the court.
#18 by grace on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 9:38 am
Guiness Book Of RECORDS FOR COUNTRY WITH BIGGESTCOVER-UPS= M A L A Y S I A!!!!
RCI, I do not have faith in the inquiry. I believe if they are serious in wanting to cleanse the judiciary, all willing witnesses like Anwar or Syed Idid should take their stands.
Haider and al those former judges should recuse themselves. Hauder as shown by Karpal is related to Ahmad Fairuz by their siblings marriage! Haider claim that the relationship ceased when one of the sposes died. HO! HO!Ho! When can a relation ceased?
#20 by shortie kiasu on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 7:44 pm
When we follow the proceedings of the Royal Commission’s daily hearing we can see the obvious partiality and biase shown by some of the commissioners.
They tried to push away some of the evidence and witnesses which are detrimental to some of the ex judges.
At the end of the hearing, besides conclusions and reports, what action can be taken against those guilty of corruption, indiscretion, abuse of power, some questionable judgments??
As any works of past commissions, it will be forgotten in no time.
#21 by bahkuteh on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 10:21 pm
ACA was openly paying rm3000!what kind of world are we living in?Now i know,the Dato’seri whom was accused of killing his relative chinese-man in a swimming pool was settled!Altantuya’s father,1 million,no,2 million?no,5 million?no,5 million usd?yes!”Najis,i will never bother you again!” :-)
#22 by pwcheng on Saturday, 16 February 2008 - 1:32 am
Right from he start, all of us with some intelligence knows that this RCI (Rigged Commission of Inquiry) is a fixed up.
What a joke ” a fix-up inquiring into a fixed-up”.
Can we arrange to put it into the Guinness Book of records??
#23 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 16 February 2008 - 7:24 am
“Ranging from using rude words to wanting to ‘hammer’ his wife, VK Lingam’s former driver D Ramachandran revealed that his ex-boss’ attitude was the reason why he quit his job.” Malaysiakini
I never knew him to be an abusive husband! Secretary resigned. Driver resigned. Brother snitched on him. They provide a treasure trove of information.
#24 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 16 February 2008 - 7:55 am
Having regard to the narrow terms of reference:
*To enquire and ascertain the authenticity of the video clip;
*To enquire and identify the identity of the person in the video clip, to whom he was speaking to and the persons mentioned in the coversation;
* To enquire and ascertain the truth of the content of the conversation in the video clip;
*To determine whether there is any misconduct by the person or persons identified or mentioned in the video clip; and
* To recommend appropriate action to be taken against the person or persons identified or mentioned in the video clip if the person or persons found to have committed any misconduct.
I am willing to bet that the conclusion reached will be inconclusive. What does that mean? Anybody’s guess!
#1 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 8:32 pm
A small question.
Why should we depend on the subpoena? Why can’t Anwar’s lawyer for example, offer Tuan Syed Ahmad Idid as a witness. Make him available to the Commission. Syed Ahmad could be just outside the court door waiting to be called should the Commission see fit to do so?
That would put pressure on the Commission. Here is a material witness who has voluntarily come to testify, believing that he is under a duty to king and country to do so!
#2 by LittleBird on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 8:34 pm
YB,
Do many videolah…not all got streamyx!!!
#3 by gofortruth on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:04 pm
Thank you uncle Lim our Malaysia Father of Democracy.
Great stuff! All very clear & precise to the point. A bit too long, 4min will be perfect. End with a powerful challenge for CHANGE for a better Malaysia.
TOGETHER WE CAN CHANGE IT!
What about –
1) PKFZ4.6B
2) The fighter jets
3) The submarines
4) The Mongolian C4
5) The AG audit report
6) Rising Crimes
7) Falling Education Standards
8) Why two 10 million Rm funds for Chinese school only announced so close to general election? Bribery ah?
Why only 20 millions Rm for the education of millions of Chinese when we could afford to spend 100million Rm & bought a space ticket for the travel of just one man.
9) etc etc
God bless Malaysia!
#4 by boomingray on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:35 pm
during the TDM ‘s era,ppl thought that he was irreplaceable,that’s why he was given a very long period of mandate,inspite the mb,mp,pdrm,aca,even the judiciary also join the ‘ban-wagon ‘toward corruptions!
we are what we did,blame ourselves!Singapore is truely an exception,mainly due to steady and solid payroll system for the govt. servants and most importantly,they practise meritocracy,not stupidity and crazy NEP!
#5 by waterfrontcoolie on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:41 pm
Dear All, by now we should all realize that all MEGA projects have only ONE OBJECTIVE: i.e. to enrich the Minister of the Ministry that under take the job! Period. Based on the so-called NEGOTIATED TENDER, the viability of the project is of no concern to the GOMEN. Failure means the next Minister will have one more round! Simple as that.
All that is left for ALL right thinking Malaysians to do now is to go to the BOOTHS to cast your votes! Of course, you know what to do. By the way, don’t ever hope the West would be bothered to promote ‘clean’ GOMEN, they are only interested to ensure non-Westerners failed miserably, so that they can come to create more problems. Only Malaysians can decide their own fate.
#6 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 10:53 pm
Xenophobia is bad for the country.
#7 by izrafeil on Thursday, 14 February 2008 - 11:00 pm
JUDICIARY HANCUR SUDAH….
#8 by mendela on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 1:06 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taVW8Kv2HcQ
#9 by mendela on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 1:43 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7xvegPH_Lw
#10 by damianyeow on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 1:53 am
Sigh…..This Lingam Tape scandal, as in Rahim Thamby Chik scandal, Vijendran Porno & Altantuya cases will just drag on & on & on, until when the public conveniently forgets, then “tutup case, bahan bukti hilang” M’sia Boleh mah, BN Boleh, UMNO Boleh, Bodowi Boleh, Samy-Idiot Boleh, Boleh Apa, Boleh Tipu… rakyat percaya. so Siapa Bodoh?
#11 by Jeffrey on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 6:31 am
Are we sure ex judge Dato’ Syed Ahmad Idid who is the Director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration, would still, at this moment and time, want to “rock the establisment boat” to testify about maters relating to his 112 allegations of judicial corruption and ensuing forced resignation more than a decade ago?
#12 by undergrad2 on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 6:39 am
Jeffrey QC,
Believe me. This guy has integrity.
#13 by Bigjoe on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 7:23 am
There is no choice now. Bar Council must organize a mass rally to protest. They must go to the PM now and get him to promise a full independent RCI on the entire judiciary otherwise, they should organise a mass rally best even before the election is done.
A protest during the election would kill it and damage this government because they would have to call off the election and postphone what are painful decisions that have been accumulating for months if not years. It may mean emergency rule but at the very least kill the legitimacy of Badawi’s administration which will lead to his eventual downfall.
This country cannot avoid a cathartic change, its best to get it done as soon as possible. Badawi view that it will take 30 years to reform essentially is none. Its sweeping things under the carpet with the hope that somehow the future will take care of itself. Its irresponsible, unjust and dangerous.
#14 by Bigjoe on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 7:36 am
There is another reason why I think this mass rally should happen during the election.
For the last two days, I have watched the announcement on the election both by the PM and SPR’s Tan Sri Rashid. The arrogance in their voice sickens me. Even the PM is arrogant because he think the Malay votes are behind him.
The PM of Malaysia is for all Malaysian because of founders thought that this country have no future as a monolithic entity. If the other races don’t vote for it, it don’t matter if he has 100% of the Malay vote. If overwhelming majority of other races don’t vote for BN, it kills the legitimacy of BN. It kills the very basis of our nation-hood and thereby nothing else matters, not the constitution, the rule of law, institutions etc everything the hegemonist have been building up.
That is what Chinese masses don’t get, you can’t have a very angry 30% of the population. Hell its not even legitimate to have an angry 8% of the population. Majority rule does not mean minority rights can be ignored.
The last two days, I feel they have certaintly forgot that.
#15 by undergrad2 on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 8:00 am
“They must go to the PM now and get him to promise a full independent RCI on the entire judiciary …” Bigjoe
The present proceedings to determine the authenticity of the Lingam tape should expose enough of what went on so the issue of corruption in high places within the judiciary could be investigated. A mass rally involving lawyers now would not look good as lawyers are also officers of the court.
#16 by undergrad2 on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 8:02 am
“Majority rule does not mean minority rights can be ignored.”
It should be apparent to all that we have been under the tyranny of the majority over the minority for some time now.
#17 by helpless on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 9:10 am
I am sick reading newspaper which continue to report PM, DPM,MB and all idiot … have to be removed for negligence, corruption and no integrity.
Can someone comment if it is right to claim the position before next election?
#18 by grace on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 9:38 am
Guiness Book Of RECORDS FOR COUNTRY WITH BIGGESTCOVER-UPS= M A L A Y S I A!!!!
RCI, I do not have faith in the inquiry. I believe if they are serious in wanting to cleanse the judiciary, all willing witnesses like Anwar or Syed Idid should take their stands.
Haider and al those former judges should recuse themselves. Hauder as shown by Karpal is related to Ahmad Fairuz by their siblings marriage! Haider claim that the relationship ceased when one of the sposes died. HO! HO!Ho! When can a relation ceased?
#19 by Anti_NEP on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 12:42 pm
Royal wayangkulit show will be more appropriate, YB Lim.
#20 by shortie kiasu on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 7:44 pm
When we follow the proceedings of the Royal Commission’s daily hearing we can see the obvious partiality and biase shown by some of the commissioners.
They tried to push away some of the evidence and witnesses which are detrimental to some of the ex judges.
At the end of the hearing, besides conclusions and reports, what action can be taken against those guilty of corruption, indiscretion, abuse of power, some questionable judgments??
As any works of past commissions, it will be forgotten in no time.
#21 by bahkuteh on Friday, 15 February 2008 - 10:21 pm
ACA was openly paying rm3000!what kind of world are we living in?Now i know,the Dato’seri whom was accused of killing his relative chinese-man in a swimming pool was settled!Altantuya’s father,1 million,no,2 million?no,5 million?no,5 million usd?yes!”Najis,i will never bother you again!” :-)
#22 by pwcheng on Saturday, 16 February 2008 - 1:32 am
Right from he start, all of us with some intelligence knows that this RCI (Rigged Commission of Inquiry) is a fixed up.
What a joke ” a fix-up inquiring into a fixed-up”.
Can we arrange to put it into the Guinness Book of records??
#23 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 16 February 2008 - 7:24 am
“Ranging from using rude words to wanting to ‘hammer’ his wife, VK Lingam’s former driver D Ramachandran revealed that his ex-boss’ attitude was the reason why he quit his job.” Malaysiakini
I never knew him to be an abusive husband! Secretary resigned. Driver resigned. Brother snitched on him. They provide a treasure trove of information.
#24 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 16 February 2008 - 7:55 am
Having regard to the narrow terms of reference:
*To enquire and ascertain the authenticity of the video clip;
*To enquire and identify the identity of the person in the video clip, to whom he was speaking to and the persons mentioned in the coversation;
* To enquire and ascertain the truth of the content of the conversation in the video clip;
*To determine whether there is any misconduct by the person or persons identified or mentioned in the video clip; and
* To recommend appropriate action to be taken against the person or persons identified or mentioned in the video clip if the person or persons found to have committed any misconduct.
I am willing to bet that the conclusion reached will be inconclusive. What does that mean? Anybody’s guess!