Archive for category Court
Wong Chin Huat’s arrest – would Najib’s police detain Mahatma Gandhi for his civil disobedience campaign if the “Great-Souled” Indian is alive in Malaysia today?
Posted by Kit in Court, Human Rights on Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Picture taken at Jalan Duta court lock-up, where Chin Huat was held awaiting remand hearing.
Civil society activist and poll reform group Bersih spokesperson Wong Chin Huat told me at the Jalan Duta Courts Complex lockup that he had been wearing black for 89 days to protest the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak since Feb. 5, 2009, but he was compelled to wear the compulsory orange police lock-up uniform on the 90th day.
He asked like-minded, justice and democracy-loving Malaysians to join in the protest against the undemocratic and illegal “coup d’etat” in Perak by wearing black, particularly tomorrow.
This is because tomorrow is the 91st day of the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak, when the usurper and illegitimate Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir is convening an illegal meeting of the Perak State Assembly to secure legitimacy for his totally illegitimate administration.
Chin Huat is in high and fighting spirits although he had been in police custody since 7.40 p.m yesterday when a platoon of nine police officers surprised Chin Huat outside his home in Taman Sri Sentosa, Kuala Lumpur as he was going out for dinner.
Read the rest of this entry »
N.H. Chan: An inconvenient judge
Posted by Kit in Constitution, Court, Judiciary, Perak on Thursday, 30 April 2009
by Debra Chong | The Malaysian Insider
IPOH, April 30 — Chan Nyarn Hoi lives in a modest two-storey semi-detached house in a quiet lane near the state stadium in Perak with his wife, a dog and seven large Japanese carp.
At 74 years old and with ruddy smooth cheeks under a full head of snowy white hair, few would connect him to the acerbic, no-nonsense former judge Datuk N.H. Chan, who has in the last couple of months done the unthinkable: fire away missives at judges who have trampled on the Federal Constitution in deciding issues related to the power grab in Perak. His lengthy articles have reminded Malaysians of a time gone by when towering individuals sat on the Bench and simplified the Perak constitutional crisis for the common man.
Still seething over the events that transpired in Perak and decisions of the apex court, he says that if Malaysians are upset with the state of the judiciary and think that the present crop of judges are not up to the mark, they should exercise the power of their vote to change the state of affairs in the country.
Born in Ipoh on March 27, 1935, Chan was admitted to the Bar in 1961. He was a lawyer for almost two decades before becoming a High Court judge and moving to Kuala Lumpur.
He was among the first batch of High Court judges to be elevated to the Court of Appeal, set up in 1994 to act as an intermediate court between the High Court and the apex court.
Read the rest of this entry »
When the highest court in the land could bring down the Government of the day
by N H Chan
The front page of the Star newspaper of Friday, 17 April 2009 carries this startlingly outrageous decision of the Federal Court. The headline proclaims “Court: Siva does not have right to suspend seven”. The report reads:
PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has unanimously ruled that Perak Assembly Speaker V Sivakumar does not have the power to suspend Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abd Kadir and six state executive council members from attending the assembly.
It granted a declaration that the seven assemblymen were entitled to take part in all the assembly sittings and to carry out their duties.
Court of Appeal president Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, who chaired a five-man panel yesterday, said the Speaker’s decision to suspend the seven applicants was ultra vires (outside the law) and invalid.
… The other judges were Chief Judge of Malaya Arifin Zakaria and Federal Court Judges Nik Hashim Nik Ab. Rahman, S Augustine Paul and Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin.
This is a perverse judgement of the Federal Court. It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says,”The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”. The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
Read the rest of this entry »
When justice is not administered according to law
by N.H.Chan
The story unfolds with the application of three turncoat members of the Perak legislative assembly for a declaration that Speaker Sivakumar’s order, which was made in the legislative assembly, that their seats in the assembly have become vacant because they have resigned was illegal. Here is the report from the Sun newspaper, Thursday April 2 2009:
IPOH: The High Court yesterday dismissed the application by Perak State Assembly Speaker V Sivakumar to strike out an original summons brought by the three independent assemblymen, seeking a declaration that Sivakumar’s order to declare their assembly seats vacant was illegal.
Justice Datuk Balia Yusuf Wahi set April 8 to hear the suit by the assemblymen Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu (Changkat Jering), Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) against the speaker.
He also dismissed an application by three former Pakatan Rakyat state executive Councillors . . . and three registered voters to intervene in the case, ruling that they are not interested parties as claimed.
Sivakumar had declared the three state seats vacant based on their pre-dated resignation letters as the three assemblymen were formerly from the ruling coalition. Their resignation from their parties caused the balance of power to shift to Barisan Nasional.
Sivakumar had informed the Election Commission (EC) to call for fresh elections for these three seats but the EC declined and said the seats were not vacant. The three assemblymen then referred their suit to the High Court here for a ruling that they had not vacated their seats as declared by Sivakumar.
I don’t have to tell you how to judge the judge. You must know by now how to do it if you have read my articles in the internet. You will know he is a bad judge if he behaves unfairly to one side as against the other. It is your perception as a member of the public that matters and not what the judge thinks of himself. A judge who does not appear to be fair is useless to the judicial process. As such he is a bad judge and is therefore unfit to sit on the bench. The other essential qualification of a judge is to administer justice according to law. That said, we can now judge this judge.
Article 72, Clause (1) ofthe Federal Constitution clearly states:
Scraping the bottom of the barrel for judicial talent
Posted by Kit in Constitution, Court, Judiciary, Perak on Friday, 27 March 2009
How to judge a judge
– a talk given to the Perak Bar on 7 March 2009 –
by N. H. Chan
The judge’s craft
Before anyone can hope to be able to judge a judge it is essential that he should know about his craft. It is only when you know of the judge’s craft that you will be able to judge the performance of the judges: it is only then that you will know the difference between the good and the bad judges. But before you go about judging them, remember the words of the most liberal of American judges, judge Learned Hand, who once wrote:
“… while it is proper that people should find fault when the judges fail, it is only reasonable that they should recognise the difficulties. Perhaps it is only fair to ask that before the judges are blamed they shall be given the credit of having tried to do their best. Let them be severely brought to book, when they go wrong, but by those who will take the trouble to understand. (Leaned Hand, The Spirit of Liberty, at page 110)”
So do take the trouble to understand, then, you may severely bring the judges to book whenever they go wrong.
Read the rest of this entry »
Sedition charge against Karpal
Posted by Kit in Court, DAP, Najib Razak, Pakatan Rakyat, Perak on Wednesday, 18 March 2009
(The following is the charge preferred against DAP National Chairman and MP for Bukit Gelugor Karpal Singh under Sedition Act 1948 at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on Tuesday 17 March 2009)
DALAM MAKAMAH SESYEN DI KUALA LUMPUR
KES TANGKAP NO:
PENDAKWA RAYA
LAWAN
KARPAL SINGH A/L RAM SINGH
Pertuduhan
Kamu didakwa atas kehendak Pendakwa Raya dan pertuduhan terhadap kamu ialah:
“Bahawa kamu pada 6 Februari 2009 jam antara 12.00 tengahari dan 12.30 petang di Tetuan Karpal Singh & Co yang beralamat No. 67, Jalan Pudu Lama, dalam Daerah Dang Wangi, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur dalam satu sidang akhbar telah menyebut kata-kata menghasut (transkrip ucapan dilampirkan sebagai LAMPIRAN ‘A’ kepada pertuduhan ini dan kata-kata menghasut digariskan); dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan di bawah seksyen 4(1)(b) Akta Hasutan 1948 (Akta 15) dan boleh dihukum di bawah seksyen 4(1) Akta yang sama.”
Hukuman
Kamu boleh, bagi kesalahan kali pertama, didenda tidak melebihi lima ribu ringgit atau dipenjara selama tempoh tidak melebihi tiga tahun atau kedua-duanya, dan bagi kesalahan yang kemudian boleh dipenjara selama tempoh tidak melebihi lima tahun.
Bertarikh pada 16 Mac 2009
PENDAKWA RAYA
[signature]
(TAN SRI ABDUL GANI PATAIL)
PENDAKWA RAYA
Read the rest of this entry »
Karpal charged with sedition for saying Sultan can be sued
By Debra Chong
The Malaysian Insider
17.3.09
KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 – DAP chairman Karpal Singh was charged this morning with sedition for saying Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin’s removal as Perak menteri besar by Sultan Azlan Shah could be questioned in a court of law.
The veteran lawyer-politician was charged at the Sessions Court here before Judge Mohamad Sekeri Mamat under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1946.
Karpal is further accused of several other seditious statements related to the entire Perak constitutional crisis which began a month ago.
He is accused of committing the crime during a press conference at his law firm here on February 6.
A partial transcript of the press conference, which formed the basis for the charge, was read out in open court.
Among the underlined statements, which are allegedly seditious are:
“With that ruling of the federal court which has stood the test of time for 32 years beyond a pale of a doubt, the Sultan of Perak has contravened Article 16(6) of the Constitutions of the State of Perak,” referring to a 1977 Federal Court decision that the King had acted beyond his authority in confirming three detention orders under the Emergency Ordinance.
“Clearly the Sultan of Perak cannot invoke his powers under Article 16(1) which states [His Royal Highness shall appoint an Executive Council] to appoint a Barisan Nasional Executive Council with a new Menteri Besar and a new government. The Government of a Menteri Besar Dato’ Haji Nizar bin Jamaluddin still had constitutional supremacy and legitimacy. The actions of the Sultan of Perak are clearly, premature.” Read the rest of this entry »
Karpal to be charged with sedition
Understand that DAP National Chairman and MP for Bukit Gelugor Karpal Singh is to be charged with sedition at the Jalan Duta Sessions Court, Kuala Lumpur tomorrow morning at 9 am.
Darkness descends every day with Najib Razak getting closer to become the next Prime Minister.
How to judge the judge?
Posted by Kit in Constitution, Court, NH Chan, Parliament, Perak on Friday, 6 March 2009
by N. H. Chan
In The Sun newspaper, March 4, 2009, I read on page 1 this alarming report:
“Ipoh High Court grants injunction sought by Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and the six State Executive Councillors to stop speaker V. Sivakumar from convening any state assembly sitting.
Court also ruled that Sivakumar’s five lawyers have no legal standing to represent him in the case filed by Zambry to seek a declaration that Sivakumar’s decision to suspend him and his executive council was unconstitutional and unlawful.”
The arrogance of a novice judge
I must say I was taken aback by the astonishing ruling of the High Court judge. The full report is on page 6 of the newspaper. There I find that the judge was Mr Ridwan Ibrahim, a judicial commissioner. He ruled that the lawyers “engaged by Sivakumar had no locus standi to represent him in an application by Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir, who is seeking a declaration that Sivakumar’s decision to suspend him and his executive council was unconstitutional and unlawful”.
Sivakumar’s leading lawyer was Mr Tommy Thomas, and I quote from the newspaper of what he said: Read the rest of this entry »
Ronnie Liu charged – third political trial after 308 political tsunami
I was at the Petaling Jaya Magistrate’s Court 3 where DAP Selangor State Exco member Ronnie Liu was charged with a new-fangled offence – abetting in the obstruction of a public officer in the carrying out of his duty without the alleged principal offender being charged.
If convicted, Ronnie will be liable to the penalties of the parent charge of Section 186 of the Penal Code on obstruction of a public officer in carrying out his duties, i.e. RM10,000 fine, two years jail or both. This can lead to forfeiture of Ronnie’s position as Selangor State Assemblyman and Exco member and disqualification from standing for any elective office for five years.
Ronnie’s charge is the third political trial after the March 8 political tsunami, after blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin for criminal defamation and sedition and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy.
Clearly, the Barisan Nasional leaders have neither heard the message nor learn the lessons of the March 8 “political tsunami” which, in the relevant case, is that there should be no more political trials in the country. Read the rest of this entry »
Irene Fernandez: The Best or Worst of Malaysia?
by Suzette Standring
November 2008
Huffington Post
It is a textbook case of laws being used to crush critics of governmental operations. Malaysia may be 9,296 miles from the United States, but the theme of authorities seeking to silence protest is a universal one. Thus when such a bell tolls, it can toll for thee.
The criminal appeal of Irene Fernandez, age 62, begins (Oct. 28-30) at the Criminal High Court in Kuala Lumpur. It is the longest running legal attempt in Malaysian history to punish a bearer of bad news. In August 1995, Fernandez made public her report, Abuses, Torture and Dehumanised Treatment of Migrant Workers at Detention Centres. It was based on interviews with 300 detainees, each of whom Fernandez spoke with in her role as director and co-founder of Tenaganita, a non-governmental organization (NGO) in Kuala Lumpur that has worked to protect the rights of foreign workers since 1991.
She gave voice to bloodied and abused immigrants held in centers pending deportation. Unspeakable filth, dehydration and rape of children were part of her documented report. In 2003 she was convicted of “maliciously publishing false news,” under Section 8A(2) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act (1984) – even though the Malaysian government did admit to 46 detention-center related deaths. Read the rest of this entry »
Game’s Up, Gani, Time To Go!
Posted by Kit in Anwar Ibrahim, Court, Martin Jalleh on Saturday, 18 October 2008
By Martin Jalleh
Lady Justice haunts and hounds Bolehland’s Attorney-General (AG) Abdul Gani Patail over his hidden hand in Anwar Ibrahim’s trials 10 years ago. The skeletons in his cupboard hang out. He can no longer hide behind the skirt of the Executive. The naked truth has caught up with him.
The latest expose on the AG having abused his power to fabricate evidence in Anwar’s trials was made by Lim Kit Siang in Parliament yesterday (Malaysiakini, 15.10.08). The veteran politician likened Gani to a “criminal” and demanded that he “resign immediately”.
Quoting unnamed sources, Kit Siang said that he understands that solicitor-general Idrus Harun had carried out an investigation into the claims (in a police report filed by Anwar) in July and “has concluded that the AG had indeed abused his power to fabricate evidence” against Anwar.
Several days before Kit Siang’s revelation, the public got to hear the startling claims by Mat Zain Ibrahim, a retired senior police officer who probed the infamous “black eye” incident involving Anwar in 1998, on Gani having allegedly tampered with evidence in the case (Malaysiakini, 10.10.08). Read the rest of this entry »
RPK to be charged with sedition?
Posted by Kit in Court, Human Rights, IT on Monday, 5 May 2008
i have been informed that Raja Petra Kamaruddin has been ordered to surrender himself at the Jalan Duta magistrate’s court at 9.30 am tomorrow to be charged with sedition.
I have not been able to contact RPK to get confirmation.
Gani owes public apology to Batu Caves 31 for travesty of justice of total incarceration of 403 days
The Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail owes the Batu Caves 31 who were unjustly incarcerated for 13 days and their families a public apology for the sufferings and hardships they should not have been made to go through.
Gani’s explanations why he dropped the charges of attempted murder against the Batu Caves 31 in the Shah Alam Sessions Court underline the grave injustice which the Attorney-General had caused the 31 with the ridiculous charge of attempted murder and collective punishment of the 31 with the denial of bail for 13 days, resulting in a number of victims losing their jobs.
Two reasons had been given by Gani.
Gani said: “We can’t pinpoint who exactly did it or rather who was the one who threw the brick at the person who was badly injured”. If so, why did he charge the 31 with the capital offence of “attempted murder” with the maximum sentence of 20 years’ jail and fine, and what’s worse, denying bail to them for 13 days on a completely baseless contention of their being threats to national security! Read the rest of this entry »
Challenge to AG/IGP to substantiate or withdraw terrorist charges against Hindraf
I just came back to Parliament from the Shah Alam Sessions Court where the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail as expected dropped the attempted murder charge against the Batu Caves 31 after being incarcerated for close to two weeks on the ground that they are “national security” threats.
Of course I welcome the Attorney-General’s change of mind and the withdrawal of the charge of attempted murder of a policeman preferred against the Batu Caves 31 – as I had right from the beginning called on Gani to drop the charges of “attempted murder” against the 31 as well as the manhunt for another 30 on the same charge of attempted murder, as it would precipitate a new crisis of confidence in the administration of justice over selective and malicious prosecution in the abuse of the Attorney-General’s discretionary prosecution powers.
However, I am still very disappointed by Gani’s conduct in the Shah Alam Sessions Court.
Although the charges against five students for causing mischief and illegal assembly were also dropped (and they should never have been charged in the first place), the charges of causing mischief and illegal assembly against 26 remained, with their case adjourned till December 27 for sentencing following their guilty pleas this morning.
The very fact that Gani had to drop the capital charge of attempted murder against the Batu Caves 31, (which also means the abandonment of his intention to charge 30 others with the same capital offence) – which could land the guilty with a sentence of life imprisonment – is proof that the Attorney-General had abused his powers in preferring such capital charges in the first place.
It raises the question as to the real motive of the Attorney-General in abusing his powers in slapping the Batu Caves 31 with such a serious charge when there is no basis or justification whatsoever.
The two-week incarceration of the Batu Caves 31 who were denied bail on the ground of being “national and security threats” remains a blot on the nation’s administration of justice and the tenure of Gani Patail as Attorney-General. Read the rest of this entry »
Call on AG to agree to bail for 31 Hindraf protestors – emergency debate in Parliament on Monday
Posted by Kit in Court, Crime, Human Rights, Indians on Friday, 7 December 2007
I have this morning given notice to the Parliament Speaker, Tan Sri Ramli Ngah, to move an emergency motion on Monday on the allegation by the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, that Hindraf is linked to terrorists and is canvassing for support from terrorist groups.
It will be Malaysia’s misfortune and tragedy if the government’s sole concern is to indiscriminately demonise the Hindraf leaders over their allegations of “ethnic cleansing” and genocide of Indians in Malaysia which were not the reasons for the 30,000-strong Hindraf demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on November 25 and use them as excuses to completely disregard the legitimate grievances of two million Malaysian Indians at their long-standing marginalization as Malaysian citizens.
I am shocked at the Attorney-General’s role in the escalation of such “denial-and reprisal” response — belatedly charging 31 Hindraf protestors for the capital offense of attempted murder of a cop and objecting to any grant of bail, resulting for all intent and purpose of their being immediately jailed in Sungai Buloh prison indefinitely for months on end until the end of the trial.
If this is not a travesty of justice, I do not know what is!
Tan Sri Gani Patail must know that as Attorney-General, he is the chief legal officer not only of the government but for all 27 million Malaysians and he must not act in any vengeful, vindictive or bullying manner — something which he seemed to have forgotten in the past two days in his appearance in court over the prosecution of the Hindraf protestors.
I urge him to reconsider his objections to the granting of bail to the 31 protestors and to agree to their release on bail pending trial and to take the personal initiative to submit such an application to the court — or he will be doing a great injustice and disservice not only to the public image of the Attorney-General’s Chambers, but to popular support for the Barisan Nasional government. Read the rest of this entry »
Why AG appeared for charging 26 Hindraf supporters but did not appear for Altantunya murder trial?
Posted by Kit in Court, Human Rights, Indians on Wednesday, 5 December 2007
The personal appearance of the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Ghani Patail at the Shah Alam Sessions Court yesterday to lay charges against 26 Hindraf supporters for attempted murder of a cop has raised many question.
The first question is why Gani Patail thought it important to appear on an attempted murder charge when he never thought it important to personally handle the high-profile Mongolian Altantunya Shaariibuu murder trial on its 66th day of High Court trial in very same court building in Shah Alam, although the murder trial of the Mongolian woman has far-reaching national and international implications in view of ramifications reaching to the highest government level?
Yesterday, the Shah Alam High Court was told that plastic explosives were placed on three parts of Altantunya Shaariibuu’s body — her head, chest and lower abdomen — before she was blown up when the explosive were detonated simultaneously by using a single detonator connected to all three parts.
Secondly, questions arising from one of disbelief that as many people as 26 people are being charged for the attempted murder of a cop injured in the Batu Caves fracas in connection with the Kuala Lumpur Hindraf demonstration on November 25 , a charge which entailed a maximum 20 years’ jail with fine for the 26 persons.
If the Attorney-General succeeds in his prosecution and in securing maximum sentence, Malaysia will create world history in getting the most number of people sent for life sentence for the attempted murder of a cop — but what a world record!
These troubling thoughts raise the further question as to the real motives of the re-arrest and new charge of attempted murder for 26 people — and whether this is conducive to the larger national objective to de-escalate the tensions caused by the long-standing marginalization of the Malaysian Indians and highlighted by the 30,000-strong Hindraf demonstration on November 25. Read the rest of this entry »
Lingam Tape – MCA Ministers can undergo lobotomy or behave like traditional three monkeys, do not mean public must follow
Posted by Kit in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Court on Sunday, 23 September 2007
Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Fu Ah Kiow in Kuantan yesterday asked all parties to refrain from speculating on the video clip of a lawyer allegedly brokering the appointment of judges, saying it was unwise to make assumptions or draw conclusions without solid evidence.
He repeated the nonsensical line: “The video clip merely shows a telephone conversation between the lawyer and another person. We don’t know exactly what they are talking about.
“Therefore, we should not arrive at a conclusion before police conclude their investigations.”
In the first place, it is very clear as to the matters that were talked about in the Lingam Tape.
Secondly, matters adverted to in the Lingam Tape is not just about brokering the appointment of judges but the wholesale perversion of the course of justice, polluting and contaminating not only the present administration of justice but the whole system of governance.
Thirdly, if MCA Ministers want to undergo a lobotomy or behave like the traditional three monkeys of having eyes that see not, ears that hear not and mouths that speak not, there is no reason why Malaysian citizens should emulate them.
Only yesterday, the Bar Council emergency meeting called for the immediate establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate into the Lingam Tape and the rot in the judiciary since 1988. Read the rest of this entry »
Lingam Tape – why PM’s one-sided threat if not authentic but nothing about action to be taken if true?
Posted by Kit in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Court, Good Governance on Saturday, 22 September 2007
The initial one-sided response of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to the Lingam Tape, which has plunged the country into a new crisis of confidence in the independence, impartiality, integrity, accountability and professionalism of the Malaysian judiciary — both national and international — is a great disappointment compromising the neutrality and impartiality of his high office.
Abdullah said yesterday that he had directed the police to immediately start investigations into the Lingam Tape as it was important to act quickly because the content of the clip could tarnish the image of the country’s judiciary.
He said: “We cannot treat this lightly. We will act fast to determine the truth.”
He said that if investigations revealed that the claims were false, action would be taken against those who were trying to undermine the judiciary as the video recording would invoke public anger and hatred towards the judiciary.
He said at this juncture, the question of setting up a Commission of Inquiry did not arise as the allegations in the video clip had yet to be proven as authentic.
All right-thinking Malaysians are mystified and upset by the Prime Minister’s response and have one question — why is Abdullah threatening dire consequences if the Lingam Tape is not authentic but said nothing about action to be taken if it is proven true?
Abdullah’s initial considered response 48 hours after the public surfacing of the Lingam Tape does not inspire public confidence that the Prime Minister would rise above the fray and be absolutely neutral and impartial in handling the latest scandal of the Malaysian judiciary.
He is right when he said that the Lingam Tape has yet to be proven as authentic, but on the other hand, 48 hours and now 72 hours have passed since its public disclosure had elapsed and its authenticity has not been challenged — neither by Lingam nor Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, purportedly the other party in the telephone conversation recorded in the Lingam Tape.
The Prime Minister’s reaction is only valid and justifiable if he had received intimation from Fairuz denying the authenticity of the Lingam Tape as without such a denial from either Lingam or Ahmad Fairuz, Abdullah risks compromising his high office in staking a position which gave full status quo backing to the Chief Justice. Read the rest of this entry »
AG’s comments on Lingam Tape outrageous – is he for judicial independence, integrity, accountability?
Posted by Kit in Constitution, Court on Friday, 21 September 2007
The comments by the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail that “no criminal offence appears to have been committed” in the Lingam Tape and that senior lawyer V.K.Lingam “was in a monologue over his mobile phone and it was unclear who he was talking to” (New Straits Times) were most outrageous and raise important questions, viz:
- his understanding of and commitment to judicial independence, integrity and accountability; and
- his fitness to continue as Attorney-General.
How can the chief legal officer of the government try to minimize the gravity of the judicial misconduct exposed by the Lingam Tape and shirk off his responsibility by claiming that Lingam was in a monologue as “There is no clear reference that he was talking to a top judicial officer”, when Anwar Ibrahim’s allegation that Lingam was talking to Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim sometime in 2002 when he was Chief Judge of Malaya was corroborated by the contents of the conversation?
Forty-eight hours have passed and neither Ahmad Fairuz nor Lingam had denied that there was such a telephone conversation between them, which would be the first reaction of anyone to a doctored video clip.
Ahmad Fairuz was contacted the same afternoon of Wednesday when Anwar made public the video recording, but his personal assistant relayed the message that the Chief Justice wanted to have a look at the video before saying anything. But Ahmad Fairuz had been in ex communicado in the past two days, although he would have no difficulty in accessing it on the Internet, as it was put up on Malaysiakini almost instantly the same day (recording over 4,000 hits since), as well as on many blogs and the Bar Council website. One Youtube site which uploaded the clip registered 23,150 hits in one day.
The silence of Lingam cannot be explained by the claim that he is overseas, particularly in the present era of 24/7 and instant communications when information travels at the speed of light and denials could be made instantly from any part of the globe.
It is also most noteworthy that Gani had not challenged the authenticity of the video recording of the telephone conversation. Read the rest of this entry »
-
You are currently browsing the archives for the Court category.
