Comments - Lingam CJ Video Clip Conversation; PM: Video Authenticity & No Inquiry; Najib: Authenticity; AG Patail - No Offence; Call "Peaceful Demo"
More Comments - LingamVideo Clip–Conversation with CJ: PM: Video Authenticity & No Inquiry; Najib: Authenticity; AG Patail - No Offence; Call for "Peaceful Demo"
others: Wee C K: Royal Commission; Dzaiddin & Tengku Adan: No: Comments: Dr Mahathir: Too fragile in IJN to respond
ABOVE & BELOW: The Top two in Government have given their views under PM: No need for royal commission and
and both emphasize on the authenticity of the Tape. PM is disappointed but "no regrets" at all & talk of "damage to the judiciary" only. What about the shame it has brought to the country? - a laughing stock in the eyes of the world. Truly and uniquely this is "Malaysia bolih".Perhaps also overseas expertise can be sought to verify this Video recording. They have shown the Osama bin Laden recent video tape as fake; this 8 min Lingam Video Clip should be chicken feed to be verified as authentic by these experts and of course from the main actor himself - V K Lingam.
Check it out H E R E= == =Yes, "It's now or never, we have been waiting for the right time; Tomorrow will be too late, it's now or never" - join Amer Hamzah Arshad (see his appeal at bottom) for a peaceful demonstration at the Palace of Justice and perhaps also near the Palace of the Golden Horses where that old man (who had been pulling all these strings all these years ) is staying or in front of IJN where he is now.
= = == == == = == = == = = == =
PM: I'm disappointed
DPM: Authenticity of of video recording needs to be established first |
Tunku Aziz, Param urge PM to stop the judiciary rot |
DAP calls for Full Royal Commission of Inquiry into damning video clip
R. Manirajan, R. Surenthira Kumar and Ng Kee Seng; theSUN
PUTRAJAYA (Sept 21, 2007): Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi (ABOVE) says he is disappointed by the release of a video clip depicting a conversation, allegedly between a lawyer and a judge, on the fixing of judicial appointments. "I have received a copy of the video from the police along with the transcript of the conversation. I have also viewed the recording. "Whether whatever transpired is true or not has yet to be confirmed. We have to verify the authenticity of the video," Abdullah told reporters after chairing a Police Commission meeting of which he is in charge of promotions, salary revisions and disciplinary matters in the Internal Security Ministry today.
"This issue is important as it has caused a lot of damage to the country's judiciary system. If the evidence show what transpired in the video was not the truth, action should be taken against those who released the video, as well as all those who lodged ACA reports. "I am disappointed. The video was released with the aim of getting the people angry with the country's judiciary system," he told a press conference. Asked whether a special commission would be set up to investigate the case, he said: "There is no need for one." On the murder of eight-year-old Nurin Jazlin Jazimin, Abdullah expressed sadness and offered condolences to the family. "I hope the police will nab the culprit as soon as possible."
[…]
DPM: Authenticity of of video recording needs to be established first
SUBANG (Sept 21, 2007): Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak (ABOVE) says the authenticity of the video recording of a telephone converstion between a senior lawyer and a senior judge needs to be established before any conclusion is made.
He said with latest technologies available in the market, a proper finding need to be made, before anything else is concluded. "I have not seen the video yet. But we need to check the authenticity of the video recording before making a conclusion. We need to establish that first," he added. He was speaking to reporters after opening Malaysian Airlines Engineering Training Centre and the enrolment of 169 from Felda settlets for a course in Trainee Junior Technican and Trainee Aircraft Maintainance Engineer in the centre here. On whether the government will ask the relevant agencies to investigate the case, he said it will be decided later. Asked if he had spoken to Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim on the matter, Najib said: "Not formally." Asked whether he spoke to Ahmad Fairuz informally, he said: "I think you better ask him."
Tunku Aziz, Param urge PM to stop the judiciary rot
KUALA LUMPUR (Sept 21, 2007): Two former United Nations' officials today urged Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to act firmly to stop the rot and further destruction of judicial independence. Former UN special adviser to UN Secretar-General on Ethics Tunku Abdul Aziz and former UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers Datuk Param Cumawaswamy say the video clip showing a senior lawyer discussing over the handphone how he is influencing judicial appoinments should be treated seriously.
"We urge the Prime Minister to present to his Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to set up a tribunal for the removal any judge found guilty of gross misconduct and abuse of power. In the mean time, suspect or suspects must be suspended from office," they said in a joint-statement. Abdul Aziz and Param, both past presidents of Transparency International Malaysia, said in a press conference that they had also handed over a letter, containing further allegations against a judge, to the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) yesterday. Param said the three-page anonymous letter, written in English, but in crude and intemperate language, was received by him three to four days prior to July 20.
Param said he had written to the judge on July 20, and also attached a copy of the anonymous letter containing the allegations, but there was no response. Among the several allegations in the anonymous letter was judges had discussed a recent decision in a suit involving a senior lawyer featured in the vide recording. Param said the judgment eventually was delivered in favour of the senior lawyer. Abdul Aziz and Param also urged the Bar Council to act swiftly and institute disciplinary proceedings against the senior lawyer under Section 88A of the Legal Profession Act and suspend him from practice until the disposal of the disciplinary process. They said it was not the first time the senior lawyer has been seen "unusually friendly" with the senior lawyer.
They said the Federal Constitution should be amended to provide for an independent judicial commission for selection and recommendation of judicial appointments, promotions and to deal with receiving and investigating complaints against judges. "We acknowledge that there are some fine judges of integrity within the system. We urge them to remain steadfast and uphold their oath of office amidst the present crisis of confidence in the system," they said. Abdul Aziz said it would send a "terribly wrong signal" not only to the nation but also internationally, if the government did not act.
= == = === = == = == = =
AG's comments on Lingam Tape outrageous - is he for judicial independence, integrity,
Gani's outrageous comments of Lingam Tape as a "monologue" which discloses no criminal offence raises important questions of his understanding of and commitment to judicial independence, integrity and accountability as well as his fitness to continue as Attorney-General
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.
From the contents, the conversation would probably be January 2002 for the following reasons:
• Ahmad Fairuz was referred to as "Datuk" and there was talk of getting a "Tan Sri"-ship for him the same year. Ahmad Fairuz was awarded the Panglima Setia Mahkota (P.S.M) by the Yang di Pertuan Agong during the King's birthday in June 2002, making him a Tan Sri.
• There was reference of making "Datuk Heliliah, Datuk Ramli and Datuk Maroop" as judges – on 8th February 2002, Datuk Heliliah Mohd Yusuf, former Solicitor-General, Datuk Ramly Ali, a former Chief Registrar and Datuk Ahmad Maarop, a former Commissioner of Law Revision, received their letters of appointment as High Court judges from the Yang di Pertuan Agong. Their appointments were from
• There was reference that "in three months time" Ahmad Fairuz would be made President of Court of Appeal and "six months time" he was going to be Chief Justice - Ahmad Fairuz was sworn in as President, Court of Appeal on Dec. 1, 2002 and appointed Chief Justice of Malaysia on March 17, 2003.
When Gani said that "no criminal offence appears to have been committed' in the Lingam Tape, may be he should explain what crimes were committed by Tun Salleh Abas to be sacked as Lord President and by Datuk Seri George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh to be dismissed as Supreme Court judges in the dark days of Malaysian judiciary in 1988?
Five charge, running into 12 sheets of paper and nearly 1,700 words were levelled against Salleh Abas. Can Gani state what were the charges against Salleh in the shameful travesty of justice which precipitated the fall from grace of the Malaysian judiciary which could be termed "criminal"?
What is mind-boggling is that the Attorney-General, who had clearly viewed the Lingam Tape, should be so complacent as to find nothing improper or offensive in it and cannot see the grave judicial misconduct crying out for attention and which have plunged the country into the latest chapter of a long catalogue of crisis of confidence in the judiciary in the past two decades since the 1988 Judicial Onslaught. How is it that Malaysia, which claims to want to be a first-world nation to face up to the challenges of globalization, is having an Attorney-General who seems to be oblivious of the importance of the principles of judicial independence, integrity and accountability and the various international statements and declarations on them, such as:
(1) The Beijing Statement of Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary in the LAWASIA Region 1995 which among other things declared:
• Judges shall uphold the integrity and independence of the Judiciary by avoiding impropriety in all their activities.
• To enable the Judiciary to achieve its objectives and perform its functions, it is essential that judges be chosen on the basis of proven competence, integrity and independence.
(2) The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2002 which states, among other things:
• A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct is above reproach in the view of a reasonable observer.
• The behavior and conduct of a judge must reaffirm the people's faith in the integrity of the judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done.
If the Attorney-General assumes the stance that no criminal offence is disclosed in the Lingam Tape and that it was only a monologue of Lingam, totally disregarding the fact that it has done more than any other event in the four-year Abdullah premiership to destroy the myth that the country is making progress towards a system of justice where there is a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law, how can Malaysians expect the Prime Minister to get proper and quality legal advice from the chief legal officer of the government on what he should do for the good of the country and future generations?
Instead of one scandal over the Lingam Tape, is the country getting a double whammy with another value-added scandal of an Attorney-General who refuses to see or lift his finger to save the country from the latest crisis of confidence in the judiciary in the country?
DAP calls for Full Royal Commission of Inquiry into damning video clip
Ng Kee Seng, theSUN
PETALING JAYA (Sept 21, 2007): The DAP today called for a Full Royal Commission of Inquiry into the 2002 video clip showing a senior lawyer telling a judicial officer over the handphone how he is conspiring to influence judiciary appointments. "Only such a commission comprising of distinguished overseas jurists and judges have the integrity, capability and moral authority to convince Malaysians and ensure that truth and justice shall prevail," said DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng. Yesterday, PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim made public the video clip as evidence to show that judicial appointments could be fixed. "Due to the seriousness of the allegations, a responsible Attorney-General (A-G) would immediately investigate by calling up the senior lawyer for questioning. Instead the A-G (Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail) was quoted by a newspaper as saying no criminal offence appears to have been committed in the video recording," Lim said in a statement today. Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang, also in a statement today, described the Gani's response as "outrageous statements".
"Forty-eight hours have passed and neither the senior lawyer nor the alleged judical officer have denied the recorded video conversation. Neither has the A-G challenged the authenticity of the recording," said Kit Siang. "Gani seems to be oblivious of the importance of the principles of judicial independence, integrity and accountability," he added.
No criminal offence seen, says Gani
PUTRAJAYA: No criminal offence appears to have been committed in a video recording of a telephone conversation between a well-known lawyer and senior judge allegedly discussing appointments to the Bench, the attorney-general said.Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, however, said he was "getting further opinion on the matter and studying other information in the video clip". Responding to the video released by Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Wednesday, Gani said the lawyer was in a monologue over his mobile phone and it was unclear who he was talking to. "There is no clear reference that he was talking to a top judicial officer," he said. Anwar made public the video showing the lawyer purportedly saying he would lobby for the judge's elevation. The video was made in 2002. Anwar said the video was handed over recently by a source who wanted to remain anonymous. The clip shows the lawyer talking about how he had helped the judge's appointment to top judicial postings through a prominent businessman and a politician, both of whom were said to be close to the then prime minister. The lawyer said he was also working to get Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah appointed Chief Judge of Malaya and named a number of high-level judges in the video.
Mokhtar, a former attorney-general, was elevated to the Federal Court but went into a coma after a fall in August 2002. He died in 2003. The video is 14 minutes and 16 seconds long but was edited to eight minutes and 26 seconds to protect the identity of the source. Meanwhile, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz (ABOVE) said the authorities would act on the video clip when an official report was made. "I have not been briefed or contacted by the judiciary or the attorney-general on the matter. At the moment, I have nothing." Nazri said the proper procedure would be for any of the parties in the video, or those who may be affected by it, to make a police report.
Meanwhile, opposition leader Lim Kit Siang has called for the judge to be suspended for unethical conduct under Article 125 of the constitution. He said in a statement that the law allowed the king to appoint a tribunal, upon whose recommendation the judge could be removed from office. The New Straits Times contacted some of those whose names were mentioned in the video clip. Former chief justice Tun Dzaiddin Abdullah declined comment. Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, who was deputy minister in the Prime Minister's Department when the video was allegedly made in 2002 and who was referred to a number of times by the lawyer, also refused to comment.
= = == =
Ex-MP calls for commission of inquiry
Wee was fined RM7,000 by the then Supreme Court for contempt arising from the injunction obtained by MBF a day before nomination day for the 1995 general election. The Election Commission allowed him to contest the Bukit Bintang seat, which he won, but the Barisan Nasional candidate, Dr Lee Chong Meng, filed an election petition to disqualify him on the grounds that a person fined RM2,000 and above could not stand as candidate. The then election judge did not order a by-election but instead ruled that Dr Lee be declared the new MP for the constituency. At that time, the decision of the election judge was final.
= = == = =
2007/09/21; By : V. Anbalagan; NST
Bar Council to take action against lawyer in video recording
Sources said the lawyer's alleged misconduct was the only agenda set for an emergency council meeting called for tomorrow, following the video recording's release on Thursday. "The video tape issue and the action to be taken against the lawyer will be discussed at the meeting," a source said. The Bar Council, as the complainant, would refer the matter to the Disciplinary Board set up under the Legal Profession Act 1976. The council would first issue a show-cause letter to the respondent for an explanation, which, if unsatisfactory, would then be referred to the board. The board will set up a disciplinary committee to hear the case, which will then forward its recommendations.
Those found guilty of misconduct under Section 103 of the Act could be fined, suspended or struck off the rolls. The respondent can appeal to the High Court against the board's decision. Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee chairman R. Ravindra Kumar called for "an immediate and thorough investigation by the police and Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) of the protagonist on the video and all the persons named, as well as all matters raised that are warranted". Meanwhile, Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) handed over evidence, including the video clip, to Federal Territory ACA director Abu Zubir Mohd Hassan at the latter's office yesterday. PKR vice-president Sivarasa Rasiah said in a statement that he had handed over an eight-minute copy of a video clip, a one-minute audio recording and a copy of a press statement dated Sept 19 issued by the party on Thursday.
In keeping with the norm!
Written by Manjeet Singh Dhillon on
Missing the point!
update by Manjeet Singh Dhillon on
My earlier posting was more a disappointed gut reaction. On reflection it has dawned that the AG has actually missed the point - why am I not surprised - of the revelations. No one - and least of all me [I know better don't I, AG?] - expected you to rush off and prosecute anyone. A first year law student would be aware of the burden of proof and all the other crud thrown out that warrants a criminal prosecution. No, Mr. AG, it is more than that - it is what is insidiously displayed as being done in that clip - the manipulations, favour-granting, power-grabbing fixing up of things. It is the systematic dismantling of established institutions that ensure the well-being, progress and stability of a nation - ours! Did you miss all that? The nation has a psyche in case you did not know. Did you actually direct your DPPs to look for offences in that clip? I could have given you an answer in 5 seconds - time it takes to utter one word. But then you wouldn't ask me, would you? No, Mr. AG, look at the bigger picture.
THE BIGGER PICTURE! [See I am shouting!] Look at the circumstances prevailing in Malaysia since the Salleh Abas fiasco [ok, that was before your time], look at what has happened since - the VK Lingham holiday abroad, link it to the personalities, run the tape forward, look at the State of Denmark, dig deeper, ask, inquire, ruminate, reflect, consider the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, the role that you, we, all have to play. Is it the tree for the woods or the wood for the trees - see the drift of my posting? - or have I as usual run ahead of you?
The clip, Mr. AG, showed s*** hitting the ceiling fan. And that is not good. Splattered s*** gets everywhere and covers the good, bad and ugly equally. Do I need more parables, allegories, fables to illustrate the point, the drift of where we are going, what is happening to us, as a people and a nation. Or we all so blase, so satiated, so disgusted, so disappointed, so disillusioned that nothing bothers us anymore. Do we, must we, all wait for the crud to dry and fall off? After all smells, even that of a corpse, dissipate over time. Haven't you, Mr. AG, missed the point of it all? But then Mr. AG you are getting a further opinion. And that is good. Perhaps you will post it on the forum for us to read and review - like this clip. What a difference a day makes! And why am I not surprised!!
= == = = == = =
and a plaintive Cry for 'Peaceful Demo" by Amer Hamzah Arshad ‘
Brothers and Sisters,
Many of us have expressed our views, comments and disgust on the bar website pertaining to the VK Lingam video. The Bar Council has also announced that they will convene a special meeting tomorrow to discuss this sordid episode. The outcome of the meeting as far as I am concerned will be predictable - the BC will issue a press statement; refer VK to the disciplinary board and convene an EGM and pass a resolution (for whatever it is worth). But are these measures enough? If we are talking about any other issue such as the 'rice bowl' issue, I may be contented with them. However, the present issue which we are facing is something that is so serious which would warrant some form of immediate and effective action to send a strong message to the public and the world at large. This begs the question of what else can we do?
I, for one, would call upon the members of the Bar to rally together and have a peaceful demonstration at the Palace of Justice, asking for the Chief Justice to be suspended pending an investigation on the matter. If lawyers in
I know that there may be some of us who have reservations about having a peaceful demonstration. But my question to all of you is do we want to have a deathbed regret? Let us not have the 'what if' thought when we are on our deathbeds, wondering if there was something else that we could have done other than merely attending the EGM and issue statement/comments. If blood has to be shed, let it be for the cause of upholding the integrity of the judiciary. If heads have to roll, let them be the heads of the culprits that have brought eternal shame to our judiciary.
It would be a farce if all that we do is to just talk and discuss this matter along the corridors of the court, warong kopi and in meetings (e.g. EGM) and not take any serious action. We can joke and laugh about the video and treat it like another episode of the VK Lingam chronicles. We have had this kind of debates numerous times. We condemn, and we criticise and then we go back to the comfort of our beds and sleep over it. But I for one do not want to sleep over it anymore. Enough is enough. We are good when it comes to preaching on democracy and the right to peaceful assembly. In fact, some of us are willing to even take up a test case for that right. But why are we so reluctant to have a peaceful demonstration to protest against such travesty ourselves? It is sad if the Council does not take the lead in this matter.
Do not let someone else fight for our cause.
We have to stand up and fight for ourselves.
It is either we keep our mouths shut or do something about it (and by doing something I do not mean merely having an EGM or issuing statements).
We have to take action and the time is now.
It is now or never and to quote Malcolm X, "by any means necessary"!
= = == =
Check H E R E also on UPDATES on
the reaction 7 years ago at the Bar
And what did Anwar Ibrahim do 7ears ago? ..to recuse Tun Eusoff Chin from his 2nd appeal
= == = =PREVIEW of Next Post On
MORE PICS – Bar Members Marching to PM Office – Memo for a Royal Commission to investigate the Judiciary “pornography” video clip:
ABOVE: Malaysiakini has a late evening Update on the Bar Council EGM today under the heading.
Bar Council to press for royal commission Sep 22, 07 6:14pm
The Bar Council must have weighted the issue and restrict the march to its members. If it is open to the Public, there would create a "public order" problem for the Police and the Full force of the FRU might be at hand to rope in one and all or they might just advise them to disperse.
The Bar members are responsible professionals and they would maintain a strict peaceful march to show their solidarity and utter disgust to what has been exposed in this sordid judiciary "pornography". Whatever it is deem against the law as an "illegal assembly" of more than 5 people.
= = = =and from the BAR Coouncil
Malaysian Bar members urged to rise up to save the judiciary
ABOVE: Council members viewing the unauthentic "Judiciary pornography" video clip. Obviously, the photo is not authentic, it has been "doctored" as the actor is shown in close-up! But the members are real and you can see clearly now the outline of the actor.
= = = =and from the Bar Council President
"We have received emails, we have had many members speak to us and tell us that they are very gravely concerned about this situation. What we do not wish to see is the matter being swept under the carpet.
Word coming out from the press, the statements made out by officials is that action will be taken against those who reported the incident if it is found to be untrue or false. But I think rather than frightening people who are prepared to come forward with information, we should actually look at what the message that has come through. In other words, don’t kill the messenger. Look at the information that has been put out."
ABOVE: Other Council members with the President in the media conference
The Bar Council, as the governing body of the 13,500 strong Bar, calls on every member of the Bar to rise to the occasion and join members of the Bar Council in the march from the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya to the Prime Minister's office to hand over the memorandum. Members are requested to meet at the stairs of the
posted by multidimid at 9:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home