Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Shocking Disclosures, Day 15 – RCI – Jayanthi Lingam’s Ex-Secretary; Accepted RM3000 by ACA; Planned NZ trip with Eusoff; Direct Hot line to Vincent

Latest: February 13, 2008 13:06 PM

Parliament Dissolved Today For 12th General Election

PUTRAJAYA, Feb 13 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi today announced the dissolution of Parliament to pave the way for the 12th general election. The announcement was made at a media conference at his office here and telecast live on RTM1 at noon. The prime minister also advised all the state governments, except Sarawak, to dissolve their state assemblies to enable the state elections to be held simultaneously. He said he had an audience with Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin this morning and had received his consent to dissolve the 11th Parliament.

The dissolution of this Parliament was made 15 months before the expiry of its five-year term on May 16, 2009. The Election Commission (EC) is expected to meet soon to fix the dates for nominations and polling. Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Abdul Razak, who was present when the announcement was made, expressed the hope that the general election would run smoothly. He said the Barisan Nasional (BN) hoped to retain the two-thirds majority that it received in the 11th general election in 2004. He said the BN machinery was ready for the general election.

"The list of candidates has been fixed," he said, adding that the BN would field new faces as well as the old guard and would announce the names in a day or two.

= == = == = =
from Kit Siang's Blog
My sources tell me that Abdullah had an audience with the Yang di Pertuan Agong this morning on the dissolution of Parliament and the Prime Minister has called for a media conference at 12.30 pm to announce Parliament’s dissolution and the 12th general election.
posted February 13th, 2008 at 11: 09.45

the 1 pm news should confirm this; then Abdullah lied again
UPDATE:February 12, 2008 20:27 PM

Parliament Will Not Be Dissolved Tomorrow, Says Abdullah
BANGI, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- Parliament will not be dissolved tomorrow to pave the way for the 12th general election, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said today. "No, not tomorrow," he told reporters. Asked whether tomorrow's Cabinet meeting would be the last before the dissolution of Parliament, he said: "What makes you think it's going to be the last Cabinet meeting. "The Cabinet meeting will go on, go on and go on. You are the smart aleck, you all enjoy circulating the rumours," he said with a smile.

Speculation has been rife that Parliament would be dissolved soon. Political analysts and the media had predicted that the much-awaited dissolution would be tomorrow (Feb 13) because 13 is the prime minister's favourite number. Asked on the performance of the Barisan Nasional (BN) elected representatives, Abdullah said he was very happy with their performance.

"Generally, they (elected representatives) had succeeded in discharging the responsibilities entrusted to them. "The tasks they had carried out had also fulfilled the aspiration of the people and country," he said. The Prime Minister said he was also satisfied with the implementation of projects under the Ninth Malaysia Plan (9MP) which was now progressing well. "I find that the implementation of almost all the projects mentioned in the 9MP had started," he said. He said the implementation was carried out in several stages and was progressing as scheduled. On the statement by the Election Commission (EC) that recounting of votes would only be made when the difference in the votes was four per cent compared to two per cent previously, Abdullah said: "I will follow whatever the EC says."

see link below for MORE details & Video

= == = == == = == = == == == =ORIGINAL post Below

Shocking Disclosures - Day 15 – RCIJayanthi Lingam’s Ex-Secretary; Accepted RM3000 by ACA; Planned NZ trip with Eusoff; Direct Hot line from Lingam to Vincent Tan Apart from what is mentioned in the above headline, she also disclosed cakes and flowers were sent to Eusoff Chin’s house and also large sums of money were withdrawn but unsure to whom they were for. Also she cited an example that Lingam dictated to her a judgment which was later delivered by a High Court judge. This judgment was first raised by Opposition leader Lim Kit Siang (BELOW) in 14/6/2000 in his substantiative motion, see excerpts below

"EXPRESSES grave concern at the most serious allegations about judicial impropriety alleged in court in August in the Asian Wall Street Journal (AWSJ) defamation case, viz:
o that the 1994 judgment by Justice Datuk Mohtar Sidin in the T
an Sri Vincent Tan vs MGG Pillai defamation was ‘written in part by the plaintiff's counsel, Dato V.K. Lingam, and initially typed by the said Dato V.K. Lingam's secretaries, viz. one Jayanthi and Sumanthi’; that the judgment was corrected by the said Dato V.K. Lingam and the final draft dispatched’ to the judge ‘on floppy disk.’

For FULL details go H E R E

ABOVE: She has got the handwritten notes and Lingam will now say "Correct, Correct, It looks like my handwriting" - the corrections
= == = == = =
Earlier, Lingam's brother Thirunama (BELOW) told the RCI that he was forced by the lawyer to pretend he had psychiatric problems. Under the arrangement by his siblings, he was treated thrice including once by consultant psychiatrist M Mahadevan. He added that Mahadevan told him he had no mental problems.

Latest UPDATE: February 13, 2008 01:42 AM
I Feared My Brother, Says Thirunama
KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 13 (Bernama) -- The younger brother of lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam told the Royal Commission of Inquiry Tuesday that he "really feared" his brother as he was very influential. V. K. Thirunama narrated to the inquiry an incident where his elder sister, V. K. Lashimi wanted to go to India and marry the man of her choice. He said when Lashimi boarded the plane bound for India, Lingam used the immigration (department) and the police to forcefully bring her out of the plane. "She was sent home and locked up in her room... her clothes were set ablaze," he said, replying to a question by his counsel, Wee Choo Keong. However, Thirunama’s narration on why he feared his brother was cut short by commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor.

To another question by Wee, Thirunama said on a visit to London together with Lingam and another older brother, Lingam took several documents from his safe deposit box. The documents included travel documents pertaining to a New Zealand trip, itemised billing of phone calls which Lingam made on his mobile phone, handphone bills paid for former chief justice Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin and former high court Judge K. L. Rekraj, a poison-pen letter that he (Thirunama) showed to counsel Tommy Thomas in early 1997, and a list of judges' phone numbers written by Lingam. Thirunama said Lingam had thrown away the poison-pen letter and taken the rest of the documents to their hotel room at Hyde Park Tower Hotel in London.
To a question by Wee whether he demanded RM1,000 monthly allowance from an older brother, Datuk V. Sivaparanjothi, Thirunama said the latter called him and wanted to bank in the money into his account because he (Thirunama) did some wiring (electrical) jobs for him and cleaned his cattle farm. Thirunama said the payment stopped in 2007, when he made a police report, adding that Sivaparanjothi asked him to retract the report or risk being threatened by lawyers Datuk M. Kumaraendran, Datuk V. Sithambaram and C. Vijaya Kumar. Asked by counsel David Gurupathan representing Rekraj, on whether it was possible that Lingam might have Rekraj's telephone number because he (Lingam) once worked with Rekraj in a law firm, Thirunama said: "It is possible".

Replying to a suggestion by counsel V. Vijaya Segaran representing psychiatrist Datuk Seri Dr M. Mahadevan that he (Thirunama) was not properly dressed when he first met the psychiatrist, Thirunama replied: "It's not true". Thirunama said that he was not emotional, suicidal, mad or delusional and in fact, was normal when he first met Dr Mahadevan on March 8, 1998. To another suggestion by Segaran that he turned up at Dr Mahadevan's clinic without appointment and nobody contacted him (Mahadevan) in advance, Thirunama said he did not agree.

He also disagreed with Segaran that he told a lie in his testimony that it was his elder sister (Lashimi) who instructed him what to write in the psychiatric report. Replying to a series of questions by counsel R. Thayalan representing Lingam regarding his resignation from Tenaga Nasional Berhad (formerly known as Lembaga Letrik Negara), Thirunama said that Lashimi drafted the letter in 1997 and it was Lingam who pressured him to resign. Thirunama said in the resignation letter, it was stated that he had to resign to take care of his asthma-stricken daughter. Asked further by Thayalan whether there was disciplinary action against him because he did not attend work for three days in a row, Thirunama said: "Lingam told me not to go to work at all".

Thirunama however, said that he did not make any police report about his brother (Lingam) pressuring him to write the resignation letter. He also told the commission that Lingam asked him to run the limousine business and helped him financially to start the business. Replying to a question by Thayalan on whether Lingam and other siblings raised a finger to help him, Thirunama said: "For some reason unknown, yes". When answering a query by counsel Christopher Leong representing the Malaysian Bar, Thirunama said that after he returned from London with counsel Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, he was asked by his siblings including Sivaparanjothi, Lashimi and Lingam, to sign a statutory declaration.
However, he said he did not know its contents. "I signed the statutory declaration under duress because I was threatened that my children would be kidnapped if I did not. "I told the commissioner of oaths that I did not read the statutory declaration and he asked me to read it but I was prevented from doing so by my siblings," he said. Thirunama said that Lingam had once, come to his house and took him to a restaurant in Sea Park where Lashimi was waiting, adding that they confirmed that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) would question him.
He said Lingam had asked him to go into hiding in
India, and to also consult Dr Mahadevan. He said on March 8, 1998 he gave a statement to the ACA, adding that Lashimi later told him (Thirunama) that Lingam and his wife were crying because of the ACA statement.
"As my sister (Lashimi) became so emotional (because of Thirunama's action) I was requested to fake mental illness. "I was put under tremendous pressure at that time as Lashimi told me my action might cause Lingam to be put behind bars and that his reputation would be affected," he said.
Hearing continues Wednesday. (Feb 13 08)

= == = == = =and here the more juicier parts (not found in Bernama) Q & A from NST
"you are not mad but bad'.

Lingam asked me to remove the evidence'
V.K. Thirunama says he retrieved documents from his safe deposit box in
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk V.K. Lingam instructed his brother, V.K. Thirunama, to remove several documents from Thirunama's safe deposit box in London.

Thirunama said the documents were on Lingam's payment of several judges' cellphone bills. He said the bills were those of former chief justice Tun Mohamed Eusoff Chin, former High Court judge Datuk K.L. Rekhraj, former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mokhtar Sidin and Court of Appeal judge Datuk Wira Low Hop Bing, among others. Thirunama told the inquiry on its 15th day that his deposit box was located at Knightbridge Safe Deposit, near the Harrods department store.
Replying to questions from his counsel Wee Choo Keong, Thirunama said he made the trip in late 1997.

Wee What were the documents retrieved?
Thirunama: I retrieved the travel manifest to New Zealand and cellphone bills which Lingam had paid for several judges like Eusoff, Rekhraj, Mokhtar, Low and also the inspector-general of police. Besides that, I also retrieved the poison-pen letter on the judiciary.
Wee: What did you do with the documents?
Thirunama: I gave them all to Lingam and I saw him tearing the poison-pen letter. The other documents, he kept with him.
Wee Did you give the phone numbers, including that of Eusoff, to the ACA when you reported the matter in March 1998?
Thirunama: Yes, I told the ACA of Eusoff and Rekhraj's numbers as stated in my black diary.Earlier, when questioned by counsel Christopher Leong from the Bar Council, Thirunama agreed that he was pressured by Lingam and his other siblings to withdraw his report with the

Leong: Did the ACA come to your house on March 8, 1998?
Thirunama: Yes, they came about noon. Subsequently, I lodged a report against my brother Lingam over his relationship with the judges. An ACA officer by the name of Sazali recorded my first statement.
Leong: What happened next?
Thirunama: When I returned home, my sister Kanakalashimi was there. She went hysterical after discovering that I lodged a report with the ACA. She contacted anai (Lingam) and said Lingam and his wife cried on knowing this.Later, Lingam came with Kanakalashimi and my other siblings. Kanakalashimi said: 'Do you want to see anai (Lingam) in jail? He has built up his reputation.'

They asked me to see psychiatrist Datuk Seri M. Mahadevan to say that I was crazy and suicidal, and referred me to a Dr Devadass and Dr Mahadevan, asking me to act as if I was crazy.
Leong: What did you tell Dr Mahadevan?
Thirunama: I told him everything about the judges, corruption and my brother. Dr Mahadevan said he had heard about this but could not believe it was to this extent, and that Lingam was involved.
Leong: What happened next?
Thirunama: Mahadevan asked me to write all the bad things about myself for 19 pages, where I stated I was violent to my wife, suicidal, and mentally depressed. However, none of the things I wrote were true as I was told by Mahadevan and Kanakalashimi to do so.
Leong: What happened next?
Thirunama: I went to the ACA to retract my earlier statement. I also told the ACA that their officer had assaulted me. As a result, I was remanded for six days.
Leong: Throughout your visit to Mahadevan, did he ask you to be warded at a hospital?
Thirunama: No, he said 'I do not know what to do about you as you are not mad but bad'.

However, my sister Kanakalashimi managed to obtain my written statement.
When questioned by Lingam's counsel R. Thayalan, Thirunama agreed that Lingam helped him to set up a limousine business by paying a down payment to buy a Mercedes.
"Eventually, I withdrew from the business and the bank repossessed the car."

Thirunama also agreed that Lingam had helped to pay a portion of the cost of his RM95,000 home.

= == == == == =

= == == = == ==

Lingam Prepared Judgement In Vincent Tan's Civil Suit
KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- The judgement in a civil suit awarding RM10 million in damages to corporate figure Tan Sri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun was written by lawyer Datuk V. K. Lingam, the Royal Commission of Inquiry was told today. Lingam's former secretary, L. G. Jayanthi said it was subsequently incorporated as the official judgment of the then High Court judge, Datuk Mokhtar Sidin who heard the case. She made this revelation in her statutory declaration which was produced at the inquiry, affirming that the contents of her statutory declaration were true. Jayanthi, 45, said that between November and early December 1994, she and two other colleagues, Sumanti Jaaman and Jamilah Abdul Rahman who also worked as secretaries for Lingam, were 'detained' by their boss to type a confidential document.

She later discovered that the purpose of their 'detention' was to prepare and type a judgement in relation to a civil suit brought by Tan against seven defendants, namely Haji Hassan Hamzah, Saw Eng Lim, the late M.G.G Pillai, V. Thavanesan, Dr Barjoyai Bardai, Media Printext (M) Sdn Bhd and Ling Wah Press Sdn Bhd. "Lingam was dictating from some handwritten notes, the draft judgment in that case, for Sumanti to type. "I was seated somewhere in the vicinity of the office and every now and then, Lingam would order me to get various reported judgements from the library to be incorporated in the judgment," said Jayanthi, adding that the lawyer completed dictating the full judgement about 3am, before the judgement was printed out for Lingam to read.
"Lingam then corrected in red ink on certain pages of the draft judgement such as pages 3,7,9,19,24,28,32,35,39,40,42. Sumanti then did the corrections accordingly, and made a copy of the said draft judgment in a floppy disk which was to be given to Justice Datuk Mokhtar Sidin by Lingam," she said. Jayanthi said she later discovered that the judgment as was written by Lingam, was fully incorporated as the official judgment of the said judge.

"I must stress here, that when Lingam was dictating the judgment that night, he was aided by his brother, Datuk V.Sivaparanjothi and Adam Bachek and W. Satchithanandan. "I have kept Lingam's handwritten corrections of the draft judgement in my possession until handing it over, together with the correspond-ing formal judgement, to lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah on the same date which I handed over the other exhibits," she added.

Questioned by conducting officer Datuk Nordin Hassann why she kept all documents and photographs of the holiday trip of Lingam and former chief justice Tun Eusoff Chin, Jayanthi said before she resigned from the firm, Satchithanandan advised her to keep all the document because according to Satchithanandan, Lingam was a dangerous and vengeful person.
Jayanthi said Satchithanandan had complained to her that Lingam did not keep his promise to recommend him (Satchithanandan) to the chief justice to be elevated as judicial commissioner, despite having introduced the lawyer (Lingam) to the chief justice. She said that after leaving the firm, she met Satchihanandan in
Penang where he told her that Lingam had recommended Datuk K.L. Rekraj as judicial commissioner, instead of him (Satchithanadan).

Questioned by Rekraj's counsel, David Gurupathan whether she knew for a fact that Lingam had recommended Rekraj to be appointed as a judicial commissioner, Jayanthi replied: "I don't know". Earlier, she testified that during her tenure with Lingam's firm, Lingam's younger sister, Chinmaya Devi and his younger brother, V.K. Thirunama were working respectively, as accounts clerk and odd job/despatch office worker.

Questioned by her counsel Shafee, on why she left the firm, Jayanthi said she was accused of stealing RM1 million worth of Berjaya Group shares belonging to Lingam as she was in charge of the shares and assigned to send share certificates to a securities company, two floors below Lingam's office.
She said the shares went missing for a while but two weeks later, Lingam called her to say that they (shares) were found and asked whether she wanted to rejoin the company. Jayanthi said she chose to resign and Lingam acknowledged her resignation.

= == == == = == = == == = =February 12, 2008 20:25 PM

"I Was Given RM3,000 By ACA," Says Lingam's Former Secretary

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- A former secretary of Datuk V. K. Lingam was given RM3,000 by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) after being told that its investigations into a New Zealand holiday involving the lawyer and former chief justice Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin was closed, the Royal Commission of Inquiry heard today. L. G. Jayanthi, (ABOVE) 45, said an ACA officer telephoned her to say that the investigation was closed because it involved several high-ranking officers in the government. Asked by commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor why the money was given to her, the inquiry's 19th witness did not reply.

ABOVE: With her lawyers, two weeks after she resigned, the shares were found and was offered the job again but refused BELOW: With a friend

Questioned further by Haidar on whether she took the money, Jayanthii replied: "Yes". When re-examined by her counsel R.S.N. Rayer on whether the RM3,000 was a reward or to buy her silence, she merely that it was given to her just like that.

Jayanthii(ABOVE, with lawyers) said that in 1998, the ACA recorded her statements thrice, adding that three months later, an ACA officer, Wong Chee Kong telephoned her to say that the case was closed. To another question by Rayer whether in the course of her employment with Lingam, she had made an arrangement to have cakes and flowers delivered to the judge's house, she replied in the affirmative. Apart from those deliveries, Jayanthii said, she also withdrew a big sum money from a bank but had no idea to whom the money was handed to.

= == = == = =following Q&A from STAR
Commissioner Tan Sri Steve Shim immediately asked: “Award or reward?
Jayanthi: It was in cash. I just took the voucher.
Chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor: You took it?
Jayanthi: Yes.
(At the end of the proceedings, Jayanthi's counsel R.S.N Rayer asked her again whether the RM3,000 was a reward or if it was meant for her to keep quiet. She replied that nothing was mentioned about it.)
Rayer: Do you remember which officer it was who contacted you?
Jayanthi: A Mr Wong. It was a Chinese man.
Rayer: Was it a Wong Chee Kiong?
Jayanthi: Yes, I think so.

= === = == ==

To a question by her other counsel, Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who attempted to establish closeness between Lingam and corporate figure Tan Sri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun, Jayanthi said there was a direct communication system linking the duo.

She said there was an intercom in Lingam's room at his office, which was directly connected to Tan's office.

At this juncture, Tan's counsel Pradeep Kumar, objected to the question. Drawing laughter from the gallery, Haidar excitedly exclaimed: "This is to show the closeness as intended by Shafee."

February 12, 2008 16:39 PM

= == = == = == = == == = == = == = ==
Eusoff Chin Wants Mahadev To Recuse Himself

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- Former chief justice Tun Eusoff Chin (ABOVE) who has appeared before the Royal Commission of Inquiry into a controversial video clip, today sought a member of the commission -- Datuk Mahadev Shankar( BELOW) -- to disqualify himself.

= == = == = == = = == = == == = == = == = == =

The commission, however, ordered Eusoff’s lawyer, Datuk Hazman (ABOVE) Ahmad, to submit the application in writing together with statements by his client and other sources in support of the application. "Thank you for the stand you've taken," said Mahadev to the lawyer but he added that the commission had earlier ruled that all applications must be made in writing. If Hazman was unhappy with the ruling, he could bring the matter elsewhere, he said. In reply, Hazman said: "It's not personal. It is something I have to do on my client's instruction". He said he would submit the written application by Tuesday.

This is not the first time an application was made to have a member of the commission of inquiry to recuse himself. The first was made by lawyer M. Puravelan who represented Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim against commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor and member Tan Sri Steve Shim Lip Kiong on the first day of the inquiry on Jan 14.

It was subsequently rejected. On Feb 5, the proceedings nearly came to a halt when Karpal Singh who also represented Anwar Ibrahim and lawyer M. Manoharan, applied to have Haidar recuse himself on the ground that he was related by marriage to former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz who was implicated in the video clip.

The application was also denied because Haidar said the relationship ended over 30 years ago and he hardly had any contact with Ahmad Fairuz or his family other than on the bench. The commission was set up, among others, to ascertain the authenticity of the clip which shows a man, said to be lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam, talking on the phone about judicial appointments.

Other members of the commission are Puan Sri Zaitun Zawiyah Puteh and Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Khoo Kay Khim.

= == = == == =
Fresh bid to have inquiry panel recused themselves

Tuesday, 12 February 2008 11:55pm

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- Attempts were made today to have two other members of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into a controversial video clip, disqualified themselves. With the fresh bid, all five members of the panel have been asked not to conduct the inquiry although the commission itself has dismissed previous applications against three of them. One of the two applications submitted today was made by former chief justice Tun Eusoff Chin through counsel Datuk Hazman Ahmad, and the panel member he wanted to step down was Datuk Mahadev Shankar.

The other was by lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam who has been identified as the person in the video clip talking on a phone about judicial appointments. Through counsel R. Thayalan, he sought for Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Khoo Kay Khim to recuse himself from the inquiry. This prompted commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor to exclaim: "So now all of us are under recusal!"

Other panel members are Tan Sri Steve Shim Lip Kiong and Puan Sri Zaitun Zawiyah Puteh. he commission was set up, among others, to ascertain the authenticity of the video clip and recommend any appropriate action on the persons identified or mentioned in the clip. On the first day of inquiry on Jan 14, it rejected an application by lawyer M. Puravelan who represented Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to have Haidar, Shim and Zaitun recused from the proceedings.
Puravalen said Haidar should disqualify himself because he was a co-trustee of the Perdana Foundation together with former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and businessman Tan Sri Vincent Tan who had been subpoenaed to testify in the inquiry. He said Haidar and Shim were also involved in the judgement of Raphael Pura vs Insas Bhd & Another which addressed the issue of corruption in the judiciary at trial stage.

In that case, a party attempted to adduce a photograph of Lingam holidaying with Eusoff Chin. This particular issue has been raised in the present inquiry. Puravalen also wanted Shim to recuse himself because his name was mentioned in the video clip and Zawiyah because she handled a civil suit between Anwar and Dr Mahathir.
On Feb 5, Karpal Singh who also represented Anwar and lawyer M. Manoharan, applied to have Haidar recused himself on the ground that he was related by marriage to former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz who is implicated in the video clip. He said Haidar's younger sister was married to Ahmad Fairuz's elder brother and therefore, Haidar should not sit in the panel. Haidar did not deny the relationship but stressed that the tie ended when Ahmad Fairuz's brother died in 1973.

Both Eusoff and Lingam have submitted their written applications to have Mahadev and Dr Khoo disqualified themselves. This follows a ruling that new applications must be made in writing with the inclusion of all allegations of facts and by way of direct evidence. Mahadev said that if the applicants wanted to include hearsay evidence in their recusal applications, the source of the information should be included. He added that such application was not privilege and applicants must take full responsibility of what they say in their recusal applications. Reporters have been barred from publishing the contents of the applications until the commission has heard submissions by the counsel involved.

= == = == == = = = =further late night UPDATES

February 12, 2008 23:59 PM
Anwar Was Uncooperative, Says Commission

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- The 15th day of the Royal Commission of Inquiry began its proceedings, clarifying events which led its revoking the rights of non-governmental organisation Aliran and Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim from participating in the inquiry.Commissioner Tan Sri Steve Shim Lip Kiong said Anwar was initially subpoenaed as a witness because there was some indication that he could assist the commission in the inquiry.

However, he said that instead of assisting, Anwar was uncooperative with the commission. Shim said on Jan 18, Anwar's counsel M. Puravelan tendered a brief outline or summary of Anwar's proposed testimony, and those of two other secret witnesses. He added that the commission in its ruling on Feb 4, found that his (Anwar's) testimony to be lacking in particulars and too skimpy. When the commission requested for more details of Anwar's testimony, Shim said, Puravelan informed them (the commission) that Anwar and the secret witnesses were unwilling to supply any further details, other than what they had given in their proposed testimony. He said Puravelan informed the commission that Anwar and the secret witnesses would only disclose full details of their testimonies on the witness stand.

To this, Shim said Anwar's request was highly irregular, adding that the commission could not see Anwar any different from other witnesses, adding that no special treatment could be accorded him or the secret witnesses. He said the commission refused to entertain Puravelan's application and that its ruling not to call Anwar, PKR vice president R. Sivarasa and party co-ordinator Sim Tze Tsin to testify in the inquiry was based on the brief outline of Anwar's proposed testimony.

He said the commission arrived at that decision after finding that their proposed testimonies did not hold directly to the inquiry, adding that that decision led to Aliran and Anwar making scandalous statements online, questioning the integrity of the inquiry by not calling the trio as witnesses. Shim said on Jan 30, the commission asked Anwar and Aliran to make amends with a public apology over the publication of their articles but both stood by their statement and no apology was given. He said it was against this backdrop that the commission forfeited their participation on Feb 4. Meanwhile, another commissioner Datuk Mahadev Shankar reminded lawyers in the inquiry of their duties and ethics as advocates, following the producing of new application by counsel in the inquiry, making allegations based on hearsay evidence. He said a copy of the ethics would be distributed for the benefit of all concerned. "Every advocate being a man of honour or a woman of honour, is to bear the arms of a warrior and not an assassin," added Mahadev.

= = == = == = == = =
February 12, 2008 23:51 PM
Lingam's Former Secretary Confirms NZ Trip Was Pre-planned

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 (Bernama) -- Datuk V.K. Lingam's former secretary said the lawyer had pre-planned his holiday trip to New Zealand with former Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin and his family in 1994. Testifying at the Royal Commission OF Inquiry today, L.G.Jayanthi, 45, said she was instructed by her former boss in December 1994 to make certain arrangements for holiday travel for him and his family together with Eusoff and his family to New Zealand.
Her evidence contradicted the testimonies by Lingam and Eusoff who had respectively denied that it was pre-planned, and instead testified at the inquiry that their trip to New Zealand was coincidental. Jayanthi, the 19th witness, said she was instructed to contact Holiday Tours & Travel Sdn Bhd at Jalan Sultan Ismail to arrange for ticketing of the holiday tours since Lingam had earlier made general arrangements with the company.

She said Lingam instructed her to follow up to get the necessary travel itineraries and ticketing confirmed and issued and she liaised with a woman from the company. Her evidence on the trip was produced in the inquiry via her statutory declaration. When questioned by the inquiry's conducting officer Datuk Nordin Hasan, Jayanthi agreed that she made the statement in her statutory declaration and confirmed that the contents of the declaration were true. Jayanthi said on Dec 14 1994, she received two pages of handwritten itineraries from the tour company for Eusoff and his family as well as her former boss and his family.
"These itineraries were faxed to me on
Dec 14 1994 itself to our fax machine in the office of V.K.Lingam and Co. I was the one who personally received these two itinerary documents," she said.
"Subsequently, on or about
Dec 20 1994, I received all the tickets for Eusoff, Puan Sri Rosaini Mustaffa, Zubaidah Mohd Eusoff and Johan Mohd Eusoff and Lingam. K.Suppiah Gnanajothy, Sivashahkti and Sivajothi and Tan Chong Paw (body guard of businesman Tan Sri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun) for KL-Singapore, Singapore-Auckland, Auckland-Christchurch, Christchurch-Auckland and Auckland-Singapore flights," she said.
Jayanthi said all the flights commenced on
Dec 22 1994 and ended on Dec 30 1994 but Eusoff's flight for KL-Singapore on Dec 22 was different from Lingam by half an hour as requested by Lingam. She said the rest of the flights including all internal flights in New Zealand were common to both men and their respective families.

The original copies of 36 photographs of the trip and its negatives, 18 stubs of tickets of the holiday and two original itineraries, one in handwritten form and the other in type-written form were produced in the inquiry by her counsel Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah. Jayanthi said upon Lingam's return from New Zealand, she was further instructed by him to prepare another itinerary of the trip, further internal flights the tickets for which were separately purchased in New Zealand by Lingam for both his family and Eusoff's family for record purposes, perhaps for accounting.

She said she prepared the itinerary on one single sheet of paper adding that as far as she was concerned all those tickets were purchased and paid for by Lingam but she could not remember the mode of payment for those tickets. Jayanthi said after returning from the holiday trip, Lingam also handed to her three rolls of camera films to be developed.

"I developed all three rolls. However, one of the rolls consisting of 37 shots remained with me with the corresponding photographs uncollected by Lingam. The other two rolls of negatives and photographs were collected by Lingam. All the three rolls of films were about the two families' holiday in New Zealand," she said. Jayanthi said Lingam also handed to her for safekeeping some ticket stubs of the trip of the two families and also Tan's. When questioned by Shafee, Jayanthi said the third itinerary was the itinerary for Lingam and his family prepared by the tour company which was not returned to her by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) after closing their investigation on alleged corrupt practice by judges

= == = == == =Hearing continues Wednesday. (Feb 13 08)

NOT enough reading... MORE? and following are the links to the STAR reports (with different Title/Heading emphasis, which are basically sourced from BERNAMA in some, quoted in TOTAL above; the STAR due to "column-cm" space constrain, do not have some details). The MISSING STAR story is the latest one ON I Feared My Brother, Says Thirunama
which has time stamped February 13, 2008 01:42 AM , TOO LATE for today's STAR Edition

= === = == = Courts; Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Duo seek to remove Mahadev and Khoo from commission of inquiry
Datuk V.K. Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin are seeking to remove two commissioners from the inquiry.
Lingam wrote the judgment
Datuk V.K. Lingam was dictating from some handwritten notes as one of his two secretaries, Sumanti Jaaman, typed out the draft judgment which awarded business tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan RM10mil in his libel suit against several journalists, including the late M.G.G. Pillai.
Panel doesn’t need Hindraf adviser to testify
It is not necessary for Hindu Rights Action Force legal adviser M. Manoharan to appear before the Royal Commission of Inquiry to rebut allegations made against him by lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam.
Jayanti: Kiwi trip with Eusoff and family was pre-planned
A former secretary of Datuk V.K. Lingam said that the lawyer's trip to New Zealand in 1994 with former Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin and their families was pre-planned.
‘File closed because of government links’
The Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) closed its file on Datuk V.K. Lingam in 1998 because the case involved senior government officials, the Royal Commission of Inquiry heard.
Brother says he was pressured to fake insanity
Datuk V.K. Lingam’s brother V. Thirunama Karasu was under tremendous pressure from his siblings to fake his insanity after the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) recorded his statement on his brother’s alleged corrupt practices.

Shim clarifies why Anwar and Aliran barred from proceedingsThe Royal Commission of Inquiry clarified its decision to bar Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Aliran from the proceedings after they refused to retract their “nearly contemptuous” online statements or apologise.

= === =Go HERE the latest On
PM Abdullah announces Parliament Dissolved for 12th General Election; Nomination & Polling Dates tomorrow; All States except Sarawak follow

Can we trust a PM who less than 24 hours ago, said “No, not Tomorrow?

Watch the Video Clip Announcement plus Q & A (4 min 22 s, Speeded up 20%
plus embedded message
May ALL the Rats gnawed away BN 2/3 Majority

= == = =or Continue H E R E on

MORE PICS – Day 16 RCI - Adjourned to Friday; Commissioners needed time to hear applications to recuse Mahadev & Dr Khoo; Witnesses Jayanti & Ramachandran under tremendous pressure


Post a Comment

<< Home

Get complete protection against viruses, worms and Trojan horse programs – CA Anti-Virus 2008! Click here for cheap hotels
This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Multidimid. Make your own badge here.
Blogroll Me!

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Add to Google Add to Google
Web powerpresent.blogspot.com