But there are many issues pertaining to public confidence in the independence, impartiality and professionalism of the Attorney-General that can be raised, but because of time constraints, I will just mention in passing the following:
Why AG is so eager to close the books over the two conflicting statutory declarations by Private Investigator P. Balasubramaniam on the heinous C4 murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shariibuu?
All Malaysians are asking why the Attorney-General is so eager to close the books over the two conflicting statutory declarations by Private Investigator P. Balasubramiam on the heinous C4 murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shariibuu in 2006.
In an extraordinary twist to the sordid saga of the C4 murder of Altantuya, Balasubramaniam has hit back at the government for closing the case on his double statutory declarations.
In an open letter to attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail the day after the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz told Parliament that the Attorney-General had closed the case, Balasubramaniam said that he was “surprised” that despite having conceded to signing a false statutory declaration, the police could not find evidence of any wrongdoing.
In his Open Letter, Balasubramaniam wrote:
“I have been made to understand that you have decided to close the case involving two statutory declarations I signed sometime at the beginning of July 2008 in Kuala Lumpur.
“The contents of these statutory declarations were diametrically opposed. Both could not have been true and therefore one of them was false. I trust that makes sense to you.
“The police, I believe, have investigated the circumstances surrounding the making of these two statutory declarations under section 199 of the Penal Code, for an offence which carries a sentence of three years’ imprisonment and a fine. “This is not a trivial offence.
“The police must have interviewed my lawyer, Americk Sidhu, his secretary, the commissioner of oaths who attested my signature and a variety of other witnesses you have mentioned who were somehow intrinsically interwoven in the construction and affirmation of both statutory declarations, one way or another.
“It has therefore come as a great surprise to me to discover that you have been unable to decipher any wrongdoing from the enormous amount of evidence the police must have been able to accumulate from their investigations.
“Please permit me to assist you. Firstly, may I suggest that you re-open this file immediately. I will make it easy for you.
“Let me admit to you that I did sign a false statutory declaration. Yes, I did. I signed a false statutory declaration. It was the second one, not the first one. The first one was entirely truthful. The second one was a complete pack of lies. I admit this.
“This statutory declaration was prepared by some unknown person(s) and I was forced by very thinly veiled threats and intimidation to sign it. I have already made this known to the world at large and I am surprised your office has not picked this up as yet. Everyone else has.
“If you are unable to ascertain this information which I have just provided to you directly, please feel free to contact me at this email address [email protected] and I shall forward to you a copy of the video recorded interview I had in the presence of my lawyers in Singapore last November, and a copy of the transcript thereof.
“Otherwise you can find this information on all the blogs worth reading (such as Raja Petra Kamarudin’s Malaysia Today) and also on ‘YouTube’ (just type in ‘PI Bala’ into the search column and you will be surprised what comes up).
“So you may now consider charging me for making the false second statutory declaration after the clues I have given you. I do however reserve the right to plead not guilty to the charge as I believe I have a very good defence.
“Your prosecutors will also have to make sure they call all the necessary witnesses to prove their case against me. These witnesses will have to include the following personalities:
- A lawyer named Arunampalam Mariam Pillai (who coincidentally does legal work for Deepak Jayakishan and Rosmah Mansor’s personal companies).
- A commissioner of oaths (Zainal Abidin Muhayat) who works in the office of Zul Rafique and Partners (Advocates & Solicitors) and who attested my signature when he came to the room in which I was being held at the Hilton Hotel Kuala Lumpur.
- Deepak and Dinesh Jaikishan (very good friends and confidantes of Rosmah Mansor).
- Nazim Razak (younger brother of the prime minister), and his wife.
- ASP Suresh (a suspended police officer formerly attached to the IPK headquarters in KL).
- Officers from the Immigration Department Damansara (who assisted in obtaining urgent passports for my family).
- A host of journalists and reporters who were present in the lobby of the Prince Hotel Kuala Lumpur when a lawyer called Arunampalam released my second statutory declaration without my permission.
“These are just some of the witnesses I can think of but I am sure you know how to do your job so that should be not a problem. I don’t want to be accused of trying to teach an old dog new tricks.
“If for some strange reason my defence is called, I will also be able to provide witnesses to support what I have to say. I need not disclose who these witnesses are at this stage and I am sure you know that as well.
“I shall now wait for the charge against me to be laid.
“I will be more than happy to return to Malaysia to defend myself but you will have to ensure that my safety is guaranteed as there are some people who would prefer that I was not around.”
Is the Attorney-General prepared to take up Balasubramaniam’s challenge and charge him for the crime of making a false statutory declaration – and if not, why not.
The Attorney-General’s handling of Balasubramiam’s two conflicting statutory declarations and the C4 murder of Mongolian Altantuya do not conduce to enhancing public confidence in the administration of the justice, but the reverse – which has far-reaching consequences in undermining Malaysia’s international competitiveness and driving away not only FDIs and foreign talents, but also local funds and local talents.
[Speech (part2) in Parliament when moving RM10-cut motion for Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail on Tuesday, November 8, 2010]
#1 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 4:11 pm
Now that Bala has confessed in person to a false SD declaration, AG will look very stupid if he now maintains an elegant silence.
OK, AG, if u r not deaf, dumb or blind, act now on Bala or be forever called stupid, sinister aaand …and… well, who r u trying to cover up for?
#2 by Godfather on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 4:13 pm
Don’t you know that the AG works for Rosie ?
#3 by HJ Angus on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 5:24 pm
Maybe AG does not stand for Attorney-General but Authorised Gate-Keeper?
#4 by undertaker888 on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 5:58 pm
lim,
no need to ask this Ar$e General. the majority of us already know.
#5 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 6:05 pm
Bala’s open letter puts the AG in serious dilemma. The letter is a voluntary confession by Bala to the offence of making a false second Statutory Declaration (SD).
The AG has but only one explanation: he has by law and convention prosecutorial discretion to charge or not to charge.
But even if that were so, he has to be seen exercising the prosecutorial discretion – in this case not to charge- on defensibly rational grounds, not inimical against public interest which is his job to uphold.
In this context it is legitimate for Kit to ask whether the AG is “prepared to take up Balasubramaniam’s challenge and charge him for the crime of making a false statutory declaration – and if not, why not”.
Well the AG could say that taking into consideration the caseload in his office and the courts he wants to conserve prosecutorial – and judicial – resources for more serious cases.
It may be asked with Bala readily confessing to his “crime” what resources are incurred? Even a junior prosecutor can secure a conviction.
AG can say, “no no” Bala has reserved his right to defend himself and one good defence is that he was coerced into doing it. (Bala is therefore not morally blameworthy to be prosecuted). Now such a line will get the AG into bigger trouble because it will be asked why he is not prosecuting those who coerced Bala into making a false SD.
The best excuse is that prosecuting Bala is contrary to public policy and interest.
Here he does not need to elaborate whats meaning of the general open ended terms public policy and interest.
Here’s again there is another problem. It is a duty of a prosecutor, in his exercise of prosecutorial discretion to ensure the equal application of the criminal law to all when filing charges or declining to do so. This is because our Constitution promises equality of laws and equal protection of laws. So it might be challenged if Bala were deliberately exonerated for flagrantly making a false SD, wouldn’t this means that all other persons from now on who make false SDs are to be equally exonerated because making false SD is too trivial an offence to be prosecuted? It would be contrary to public interest if all cases of false SD were not to be prosecuted. However if the Prosecutor were to say “not necessarily” for some cases then the next question will be in what way are these some cases prosecuted different from that bof the earlier Bala’s case not prosecuted given the equal application of law principle in the Federal Constitution? What is the rational differetiating factor to distinguish prosecuting one case from Bala’s case not prosecuted? That’s a hard question.
Now the other thing is that if the Prosecutor does not prosecute, an interrested party like
Altantuya Shariibuu’s sister or father may take on Bala’s challenge and prosecute him – with same consequences of trial and publicity. An example of private prosecution is present wife enticing case widely reported in local press involving celebrity Daphne Iking!
#6 by boh-liao on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 6:12 pm
AG replied 2 LKS: OK lah, I no take action against Bala, U can cut my salary RM20, hapi?
#7 by Penang_soul on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 6:43 pm
Nothing surprising thou… Nothing was done to the the following case two years ago. The racist senior assistant concern was given due pat on her back and promoted as JPN officer. We forget things very fast. Thats the strategy used by UMNO… “The public will soon forget and forgive”
http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2008/02/23/little-napoleon-at-sk-sungai-puyu-utterly-unrepentant/
#8 by Penang_soul on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 7:15 pm
Uncle Lim, Please ask Our Beloved Chief Minister Mr Lim Guan Eng to investigate the discrimanation of the non-Malays in the state level school exams co-ordianated by Majlis Guru Besar Pulau Pinang (MGB) and Jabatan Pelajaran Pulau Pinang (JPN) whereby all students in Penang SK schools are forced to take the same state level termly standardise exams papers which is something good but what is NOT GOOD is all the non-Malays have to pay cash for the papers whereas it’s free for all the Muslim/Malay students. Why is this still practised under the 1Malaysia concept ? All the Muslim/Malays students are also given free tuition classes with free “classified” UPSR modules and papers (only for Malays) in all SK schools which is sposored by PDCA and the education department but the non-Malays are not allowed to join those classes at all or even see those modules or UPSR papers. These is a very serious matter and has been the talk of all non-Malay parents for long but nobody seems to be bothered about this discrimanations. The Malay teachers are also paid RM40 per lesson for teaching these students by the government. Please refer back to the above posting as well.
#9 by DAP man on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 7:30 pm
Kit,
Please keep pursuing this son-of-a-gun AG until he lands in jail.
This man is a national shame.
#10 by yhsiew on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 9:32 pm
It will be unfair for the AG to charge people who make false statutory declaration in future since he has let P. Balasubramaniam get away scot-free. The AG must not practice double standards – he must charge anyone who has committed the crime of making false statutory declaration.
#11 by boh-liao on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 9:35 pm
Penang_soul should ask CSL, KTK n SV 2 question Moo abt dis racially based activities
#12 by House Victim on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 - 11:50 pm
If Chief of Justice, Chief Justice of High Court, and at least 4 Judges can manipulated a nonsense Defamation case and closed the file after 5-6 years, why can it be manipulated by the AG?
The Plaintiff had cheated client and the Defendant lawyers cheated and assulting Defendant without attending any court procedures or preparing the documents and not submitting any application of discharge after refusing to act.
This is how Malaysia “works”!!
Sue the AG if you do not like it!!
Can anyone has justice in Malaysia by the existing Juridiciary systems and lawyers?
Where to sue the Chief of Justice, Chief Justice and Judges??
#13 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 - 4:46 am
Bala made two contradicting SD, that is a fact nobody can deny and must be a subject to investigation based on the charge of making at least one false SD per se, but not which SD containing the truth. The contents of the SDs therefore became invalid because reasonable doubts was established that he Bala is no person of integrity. As such the reasons behind why he made the SDs, his subsequent disappearance and reemergence in which he claimed was induced by bribery and death threats from politically well connected powerful men, consequently left him no choice but to wait for the right moment to clear himself of any wrongdoings and set the record straight, sound like a movie script than anything that can portray him in a positive light.