Posted on by Kit

Lingam tape RCI – Mahathir evasive, forgetful and irresponsible

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad was a poor witness yesterday at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam videotape scandal.

He was evasive, uncharacteristically forgetful as to be prone to sudden bouts of amnesia on certain crucial events which Mahathir had never been known to suffer from and broke his word that he would respond to all questions to the best of his ability.

Most of the time, Mahathir was evading questions to the best of his ability, including his resort to “prerogative” to refuse to answer questions for the reasons why he rejected the recommendation of the then Chief Justice Tun Dzaiddin Abdullah in 2002 for the appointment of the late Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad as Chief Judge of Malaya, favouring instead of Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim.

Mahathir was downright wrong and irresponsible in pleading prerogative to refuse to answer questions why the recommendation of a Chief Justice who was most familiar with the best qualities of his brother judges was rejected.

While the prerogative of the Prime Minister under the Constitution to decide on who should be recommended for appointment to the various high judicial offices in the country is not challenged or doubted, it is wrong to equate of prerogative of a Prime Minister in a democratic system of government with the royal prerogative of divine rule.

This is because the prerogative of a Prime Minister in an elected system of government, while assuring the Prime Minister as having the final say in the decision-making, does not give the Prime Minister the immunity to disregard accountability, transparency and integrity in the exercise of the prerogative.

This is my second disappointment with the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Tape scandal. Two days ago, I asked why the Royal Commission of Inquiry had not subpoenaed V. K. Lingam to be the first witness to ascertain from him whether he conceded the authenticity of the 14-minute tape, especially as he has authorized his lawyer to say that the person in the tape looked and sounded like him

Why was Lingam allowed to run the Royal Commission of Inquiry around in circles on the authenticity of the tape when this should be the first issue to be disposed off, with Lingam in the witness box, one way or another?

My second disappointment is that the Royal Commission of Inquiry yesterday allowed the former Prime Minister to get away so easily, when Mahathir should have been held to proper responsibility and accountability for a dark chapter in the nation’s judicial history.

Many Malaysians get the impression that the Royal Commission of Inquiry members treated Mahathir with “kid’s gloves” as they were in awe and even in some fear of the longest-serving Prime Minister in the country.

The proceedings of the first four days of the Royal Commission of Inquiry do not inspire confidence that it could play a seminal role to restore national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the Malaysian judiciary.

(Media Conference Statement at Kota Kinabalu Airport on Friday, 18th January 2008 at 1.30 pm)

173 Replies to “Lingam tape RCI – Mahathir evasive, forgetful and irresponsible”

  1. All that needs to be proven now is that he has known Lingam for a much longer time i.e. as per the taped conversation. Possibly his secretary.
    That would be enough to establish perjury on his part.
    Same for that Tourism Minister.

  2. By claiming forgetfulness and no comment, TDM in fact had admitted that that was how the CJ then was appointed.

    TDM had been responsible for many unethical and unprincipled actions. He is definitely aware of what he did.

  3. The RCI is not really interested in getting to the bottom of it all:

    Mahadev: Mr Wee, are you familiar with the terms of reference of the commission? It’s for us to determine if there was misconduct and the commission will decide what evidence is relevant and which witnesses should be called. Have I made myself clear?

    Wee then told the inquiry that sometime in November 1998, there was a further statement recorded by the ACA on the matter of close association between Lingam and Eusoff Chin.

    Haidar interjected again and repeated it was a matter of another investigation and that Wee should stick to the terms of reference of the inquiry which concerned the appointment of judges and not other matters.

    Mahadev: I want to help you to get where you want to go. If you think there are other evidence relevant to our inquiry, tell us by forwarding your submission and we can think about whether we should act on them. Leave this witness alone, why you want to kacau (disturb) her by cross-examining her? – Bernama

    http://kurasan.blogspot.com/2008/01/eusoff-and-lingam-ties-malaysiakini.html

  4. Scary. One man can pick judges and he relies on other people outside of the judiciary and bar council for opinions on judges instead of the other fellow judges who know better. Sounds all to fishy.and on top of that he doesn’t need to explain it to anyone and he doesn’t need to tell the CJ why the CJ’s recommendation was rejected. These other people giving recommendation is based on what? isn’t it interfering with the judiciary? what the hell do they know…well they do know who can be manipulated.

    was this method of picking judges practiced by PM’s before Dr.M and prior to Tun Abbas case? CJ recommends and PM endorse?

    I think it is about time we change this. The PM alone can’t make the decision and the CJ’s view as well as the bar council should carry more weight. or make it go thru a commission or the parliament. Make the selection transparent, otherwise it will never be clean or seen to be clean.

  5. YB Lim,
    This proves TDM was the architect. AAB just implement the “unfinished business.” Today’s paper (NSTP) quoted AAB is saying there is no separation between State and Religion. As I commented in MT, this is a serious issue; either Malaysia is ruled by Democracy or Islamic Theocracy. I am absolutely very sad and angry. It is not Democracy but the law of the “Mullahs.”

    Is this the “unfinished business” of TDM

  9. It’s so incredulous Tun M’s memory failed him at the crucial moment. It’s as probable as NASA astronauts forgetting to don their space vests before embarkation. Or that one shits in one’s pants because one forgets to pull down one’s trousers.

    May I add why the public perception is that Tun M has an elephant’s memory!

    Tun M was able to recall effortlessly details of Rafidah Aziz’s excesses in the AP scandal without any prodding.

    Tun M, a medical doctor, has a trained memory that can recall hundreds, if not thousands of drug names and medical terms that can only be described as super-cali-fragilistic-espi-alidocious. An elephant wouldn’t be familiar with the geometry of organic chemistry but Tun M has a reputation for remembering details others could scantly recall.

    Tun M is reputedly writing his memoirs presently which may take volumes. This is no task for a man with an amnesiac memory. On the contrary, it will require a mammoth memory worthy of a behemoth. It will be interesting to see what kind of selective memory Tun practises. But that’s a topic for another day. Needless to say, one always glorify one’s role in any memoir. Now, if Tun were to selectively recall only his perspective and only a narrow range of events, wouldn’t that make his memoir unworthy of the megabucks in retail. Then, again, if Tun chooses only to recall whatever suits his whim and fancy and with his memorable slant, why would I even bother to buy, let alone read his memoir.

    The simple point I am trying to make is: how can someone so obviously active in public life still, who continues to speak on domestic and international circuits and highly respected for his analytical skills (which requires a strong memory), be allowed to so easily shake off the RCI like a duck shakes off the water on its back?

    I think I am merely sharing what I would regard as the inevitable public perception of Tun’s testimony. Does anyone know whether a witness can be recalled to clarify earlier testimonies on a later date? I mean you can’t let a witness benefit from a ‘double jeopardy’ rule, right, Undergrad2? After all, this isn’t a court trial and the witness isn’t the offender.

  10. If Doozy had [deleted]set up the RCI the moment the tape was revealed, the whole outcome would have been different. This wheeling and dealing has bought time for the conspirators to work out a plan of escape.

    TDM’s selective loss of memory, Tengku Adnan denying everything he is asked, the RCI seemingly reluctant to allow Lingam’s brother to testify, the ACA’s transcript errors, etc seems to point towards an obvious conclusion. As an aside, Tengku Adnan accused the man in the tape of being drunk. Well, when a man is drunk, that is the time he is most truthful.

    To borrow YB Kit’s words, it seems to be shaping up to be a case of having the “looks like me, sounds like me” to “eat dead cat”. And why not? “…for PM, for the country” this is a small sacrifice. The final verdict willl be he was only trying to impress the Chinaman businessman and no harm was done. All he will get is small slap on the wrist for boasting. Two years down the road everyone would have forgotten about this case and the sacrificial lamb would be amply compensated with a couple of major cases where he can pocket millions.

    Everyone goes home happy except for the victims of this dark, dark, manipulations.

  11. If the RCI is satisfied with the answer given by TDM that it was his prerogative to appoint anyone as a judge or CJ and he was not accountable to anyone, then it might as well call the end of the inquiry.

    In this case, it is the RCI that is now on trial. Once the report of the RCI is released, Malaysians and the rest of the world will pass verdict on the RCI.

  14. For all that he have done for us today, The Done Master is slapping his own face in front of us and chewing up his own words.
    No matter how they intended to hide away the real truth from eyes of the world, Malaysian have already known the fact for a long time. Now, they just only need to compared notes and findings. Anyway, it’s a real fun journey to follow as The Done Master will be having a tough time covering his past tracks from the current leading team in BN politics.
    It’s a hard thing to control as he realyy aged and no longer in power to the grassroot level.

  15. So from now on, whatever Mahathir says, you will have to take it with a bucket of salt as it cannot now be relied upon as his memory is now suspect due to old age and by-passes which may have crossed “some wires”. So the man’s credibility and reliability is well suspect.

    He has showed contempt for the RCI. Mahathir dont know, can’t remember, don’t recall at 83 years old while his contemporary Harry Lee is so brilliant and lucid at 84. Tengku Adnan has denied Lingam calling him “drunk” and “mad”. Eusoff Chin says his “buddy” is only an “acquaintence”. Probably Vincent Tan will say he hardly know VK Lingam except for his cases and nothing more. Everyone will now distance himself from Lingam.

    Why even Lingam isn’t sure it is him when he said “Its sounds like me, looks like me” “but is it me? I don’t know, I don’t recall, maybe I was drunk and mad; I don’t have to say anything. It is my prerogative”.

    After 4-5 days, its becoming clear that this whole thing is really a charade under the guise of a Royal Commission with Haider and Mahadev guiding the way to the foregone conclusion. So don’t get your hopes too high. We are doomed for more of the same.

  16. This country is collapsing, every facet of it! We can’t do one thing right, not even properly conducting a Royal Commission of enquiry. It is no coincidence that LKY and Mahathir visited Suharto. All these old boys must stay together so that in their twilight years they will remain protected. It is a great irony that we can’t touch them when they were in power and we also can’t touch after they relinquished their power. What a perverse system we have got here in Asia!

    The malaise of the country started with Mahathir. Instead of showing him unjustifiable reverence and respect, he must now be asked to account for everything he has done. Who said the appointment of judges is the sole prerogative of PM. What if in that process, there are elements of corruption and vested interest influence? He abused his power, and yet can show his arrogance about it. Why are we as people so helpless!?!

  18. Then, why bother to carry out this charade called RCI??

    With TDM as a ‘key’ witness insisting on his ‘prerogative’ and being allowed to be evasive and feign selective amnesia, what sort of precedent will this set for future witnesses? This dragging of feet by RCI does not convey a convincing image of its determination to get to the bottom of the matter.

    Are there any avenues left for civil society to question what must be a predictable ‘crappy’ outcome?

  19. God has been very merciful to TM he managed to survive through 2 open heart surgeries within the space of 2 weeks.

    Make no mistake, God has allowed him back for a special purpose. He is given a golden chance to appear before the people whom he has led (misled) for over 2 decades, an opportunity to clean & clear whatever that had done/gone wrong, an opportunity to put the nation back on healthy footing.

    But it all appears he is taking God so likely,choosing to be evasive, forgetful & irresponsible.

  23. “//…..Mahathir was downright wrong and irresponsible in pleading prerogative to refuse to answer questions why the recommendation of a Chief Justice who was most familiar with the best qualities of his brother judges was rejected….//” – YB Kit.

    Being prime Minister, I can agree that it is TDM’s prerogative under Article 122B of the Federal Constitution to advise the Yang Di Pertuan Agong on appointment of Judges and that, subject to consulting Conference of Rulers required under Article 122B, he does not have to explain his decision to anyone.

    Notwithstanding, the above the Lingam Video Clip episode has this unusual features :

    a. According to NST report of 17th Jan “ former chief secretary to the government Tan Sri Samsudin Osman had testified earlier that former chief justice Tun Dzaiddin Abdullah had received a letter marked Rahsia (secret) dated Dec 5, 2001 (from TDM) approving the nomination of three individuals as High Court judges.

    The three were secretary-general Datuk Heliliah Mohd Yusof, judicial commissioners Datuk Ramly Ali and Datuk Ahmad Maarop, while two lawyers who had also been recommended, Dr Andrew Peng Hui and Zainuddin Ismail, were rejected.” Commissioner Mahadev pointed out that only those privy to the letter, would have known about the two rejections. Mahadev said that “But the conversation suggests that the person talking on the phone possessed confidential information”. The question is how come VK. Lingam when allegedly discussing judicial appointments with former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz knew about the rejections by TDM? Samsudin said that “we guard our information very closely on the issue of judicial appointments and promotions. Our security is very tight”. As TDM was besides Samsudin Osman/Dzaiddin the other person who knew about the rejection, this opens the question whether TDM could whether knowingly or inadvertently shared information of the rejection to anyone else that was conveyed to Lingam. Now TDM admitted that he had known Tan Sri Vincent Tan well “for many years”. And although TDM said that he only knew VK Lingam recently when he engaged Lingam for a case where Anwar Ibrahim sued him for defamation, it is however public knowledge that VK Lingam was Vincent’s lawyer for some time.

    b. Same goes for CJ Dzaiddin’s recommendation of Malek Ahmad as chief judge of Malaya which was rejected by TDM : Two questions arise here : (i) what was the reason for rejection since Malek Ahmad was recommended by CJ Dzaiddin’in accordance to Artickle 122B of the Constitution? And (ii) how did V K Lingam know about this rejection that was marked Rahsia (secret)?

    Because of these apparent inexplicable circumstances (which is just as consistent with allegations that there had been fixing and brokering of judicial appointments), the onus will shift and fall on TDM to explain and account satisfactorily to the public why fixing and brokering of judicial appointments with him, when he was Prime Minister, had not taken place.

    TDM cannot or ought not to hide behind the veil of Executive prerogative and not account (and say he could not remember) under these seemingly inexplicable and anomalous circumstances that shift the onus of accountability to him on the questions above stated.

    The events and his testimony reinforce the suggestion that we should have and institutionalise a Judicial Commission to appoint judges instead of leaving such an important function to the arbitrary discretion of one man, even if he were the Prime Minister.

  26. Anyone sitting in that position will definitely use the power for their own good, but the main question is still on how much he care for the people he rules over.

    In any case, TDM has better capability than that AAB in managing the country and grow it. While he might be wrong in some sense, but the people benefited under his rule compare to AAB’s. That is the truth.

  28. I learned a lot from TDM, always said ” I could not remember” and be evasive about critical questions. On the contrary, LKY is still very sharp minded and actively exercise his mind. From the examples of these two former leaders, no wonder Malaysia could not catch up with Singapore….

  31. One thing that I notice in this inquiry is that some of them really have poker face. This is one aspect of them which I like to learn, simply because I like to play poker but almost always lose. Simply I do not how to put up a poker face when I better my opponents stake. I do hope they can impart some of the knowledge to me.

    Oh yes, I have been travelling overseas holidays quite a num,ber of times. But till today I have not met any of my friends at random on the same flight, let alone havining the same flight itinerary on domestic flights henceforth. Will a mathematician calculate the probability of meeting a friend, A, travelling from let’s saySingapore to NZ and henceforth touring NZ with the same plan!!!

  32. What is shocking is that the PM has absolute power in the appointment of judges as confirmed by Mahathir. PM ask for a list of candidates from the CJ. who gets on that list is the preogrative of the CJ himself and if the CJ is not an honorable man, can be influenced by all sorts of people such as Lingam. All very subjective.
    Then when the list gets to the PM, it is up to his mood to accept who he wants. he can even ask his wife!

  34. lie detectors can be beaten. bite you tongue …

    we need a judicial commission. one man is not good more so one man who doesn’t rely on the CJ and a good CJ at that. Dr.M had too much power.

    anyway the leaks are there. we leaked it out?

  36. So the question is what do we do, how do we discredit or catch a witness, who comes and declares that he will testify to the truth in respect to all questions put to him and in his testimony end up saying “I don’t remember” to 99% of the questions put when, in fact, he does remember everything but we have no means to probe his mind to prove that he does remember? :)

    Any suggestions?

  37. The man remembers Vincent Tan NOT calling him about the CJ BUT he conveniently do not remember why he turned down two obviously better candidate for CJ? Ask any US President including intellectually challenged George Bush Jr. and none of them would ever forget why they do or do not appoint top judges. Its not something one get to do that often and intellectually challenging and interesting. But of course he did not do the appointments based on intellectual challenge and maybe not even political ones but his own personal opinion and power. Which is why he could not have possibly forget.

    The man lied. Its not the first time. He lied to Suqiu. He lied about Anwar. He is really used to lying and now he Badawi, fomerly Mr. Clean, is into the same practise of lying (the latest being to say Bersih can apply for a permit. Its a lie for all practical purposes).

  38. But wait Anwar, who is also due to appear before the enquiry may have something to say about TDM knowing or not knowing VK Lingam before 2003. So may some people (not yet presently known) who may come forward as witnesses to contradict. This point that TDM said – about not knowing Lingam before 2003 (when he first appointed him as his lawyer) – is his weakest point, Achilles heel so to speak, vulnerable to contradiction. .

    TDM was asked “Do you know Datuk V.K. Lingam?”

    Dr Mahathir: “I read about him when he was involved in another case but I’ve only known him recently when I engaged him for a case where Anwar Ibrahim sued me for defamation”.

    The question is only whether he knew Lingam, a simple yes and no would do and if there’s a follow up question, “how long?”, the best would be “quite some time though don’t rember exactly when”.

    Moral of the story – when cross examined, don’t volunteer unnecessary information that was not asked which could, if untrue, be contradicted by evidence of others later. Credibility of testimony will be “kaput” if the risk materialises. :)

    He should have stuck to “I don’t remember” when asked whether he knew Lingam

  40. If one says, “yes I have known him for quite some time or years on & off – don’t remember exactly when was the first time or last time we met ” – so what ? this is neutral statement, nobody can contradict it; neither does such knowing by itself prove anything improper either. After all as PM he knew many people who wanted to know him. So why limit it to recent time (2003) when he was engaged as lawyer? If one did not know a lawyer earlier and trusted him, would one appoint him in an important case?

  41. ngahc ….LKY is still very sharp minded and actively exercise his mind. ….are you sure.? – The game

    I have met people the same age as TDM, and they are still very sharp in their faculties, and their memories intact.

  42. jeffrey,

    I understand what you are saying. IMHO Dr.M was questioned or cross examined with a kids glove. I mean how can he say he can’t remember but clearly recalls VT and he didn’t talk about the appointments. selective memory. The need to question him more vigorously, yeah he is former PM so no need to be rude. Even the Tengku guy was left of after giving crappy answer. Or they need to find witnesses who can shed more light on some of these questions. Maybe Dr.M’s wife etc.

  43. The Spirit is willing but Truth is Not; Short is the memory of the key players mentioned in the Lingam Video Clip Saga. When pressed for details and confirmations of the events and circumstances mentioned in the clip, Dr Mahathir & Tengku Adan fell back to the classical defense strategy of denial – not involved in what was said and “can’t remember” or “my prerogative” and to the extent of calling the main actor in the clip “mad or drunk”. Six years is a long time to them but all the evidences are there to refresh their memories. So getting to the truth of the matter is a winding path even for the RCI
    More details at
    http://powerpresent.blogspot.com/2008/01/more-pics-lies-denials-day-4-rci-dr.html
    plus updates on Day 5 – Eusoff being grilled on his holidays with Lingam

  45. ” While the prerogative of the Prime Minister under the Constitution to decide on who should be recommended for appointment to the various high judicial offices in the country is not challenged or doubted, it is wrong to equate of prerogative of a Prime Minister in a democratic system of government with the royal prerogative of divine rule” KIT,

    … HURRAH TO TUN. Still his old self !

  46. Maybe Dr.M’s wife etc. – Rocky

    I was thinking the same. TDM will be `forced` to spill the beans, that`s one thing he cannot take i.e. his family under pressure. He goes bananas over that.

  49. Mahathir singlehandedly destroyed the real bastions of democracy in Bolehland, and now he says he can’t remember. I was thinking that perhaps we should start a movement to make him account to a Tribunal, but then at his age, he could plead dementia, amnesia, Parkinsons, whatever. God help prolong his life so that he can go on to see the damage that he has brought upon this land.

    The bigger issue before us is that Badawi and gang now knows the way forward to plunder with impunity, and hence there is no incentive to right the wrongs under Mahathir. Instead, the injustices and the deterioration of democracy continue unabated under Badawi.

  51. grace Says:

    Today at 16: 13.50 (2 hours ago)
    One thing that I notice in this inquiry is that some of them really have poker face.

    These are what you term as ‘practised liars’. Practised liars are a common breed amongst some categories of lawyers, some categories of politicians and some categories of sales personnel.

    The nation prays that such ‘practised liars’ are few and far in between when PKR/DAP/PAS takes over the helm of the country in the 2008 GE.

    Right now in BN, non-practised liars constitutes the rare exception. This is why it is both necessary & urgent to knock them off the pedestal and vote in the opposition.

  52. Rocky:

    I absolutely agree with you that Mahathir and Tengku Adnan have been let off rather easily with simple (and sometimes stupid) questions. If the Tribunal really wanted to prove them wrong, it would have been very easy to subpoena the attendance records of everyone who goes to the Jabatan Perdana Menteri for a meeting. You need to leave your IC or passport behind every time you go to the JPM. Grill Badariah and Shamsuddin Aziz. Go back 10 – 15 years. Have a secretariat go through all the phone records. Alas, it appears that the “interrogation” was designed to “fit” the final outcome.

  53. Abdullah’s government is also expected to raise oil prices some time this year and would clearly prefer to do so after, rather than before, general elections, given the strong protests that erupted in the wake of the last hike in 2006. The longer his government puts off the election, the more oil subsidies it will have to absorb. Fuel and gas subsidies reportedly now cost the government around 40 billion ringgit, or US$12 billion, per year.
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JA19Ae01.html

  54. Can anyone confirm that Tengku Adnan was once a director/chairman of one of Vincent Tan’s Berjaya conpanies, including The Sun? And also, was Lingam a legal adviser to the same companies at the same time?

    If it is true, it is strange that Adnan said he doesn’t know Lingam.

    Can anyone out there answer the above questions?

  58. “…it would have been very easy to subpoena the attendance records of everyone who goes to the Jabatan Perdana Menteri for a meeting. You need to leave your IC or passport behind every time you go to the JPM..” – Godfather

    You know what? Sorry, those records lost!!

    With all the twisting and turning and forgetting and lying, one wonders what is the meaning of OATH.

  59. If you tell the truth you don’t have to remember anything.
    Mark Twain, US humorist, novelist, short story author, & wit (1835 – 1910)

    Lingam must now being feeling what sort of ‘friends’ he had. When the going gets tough, the Malaysian toughs get either drunk, amnesiac, senile or brain damaged somehow.

    The good doctor somehow does not like his own medicine now. Looks like TDM has failed not only the country but also himself BIG TIME!!!!

  61. “Tengku Adnan accused the man in the tape of being drunk.”

    Lingam is waiting for inconsitensies. If there is any, just deny everyhting and say it is doctored, he is being fixed.

    But in case everything point to consistencies, then he can say I could be drunk, probably i do drink quite a lot that night. Whatever i said is mere coincidence, and i cannot remember it well. Meanwhile those person being mentioned in coversation merely needs to deny.
    (I am not sure i read this somewhere, lingam lawyer tries to ask Loh did he see any wine or alike, and how many bottle. – this tend to be consistent with adnan trying to bring out…)

  63. Dato’ Adnan was once Tun M’s Setiausaha Kerja UMNO. Dato’ Adnan, a businessman, was known to be Tan Sri Vincent Tan’s favorite go-to guy for projects. Word on the street is that Dato’ Adnan has 3.5million shares in Berjaya Sports Toto via his SPV, Cimsec Nominees Sdn Bhd.

  64. December 02, 2005 22:29 PM

    Bankruptcy Notice Served On Tengku Adnan

    PUTRAJAYA, Dec 2 (Bernama) — Aseam Credit Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of Malayan Banking Berhad, has served a bankruptcy notice on Member of Parliament for Putrajaya Datuk Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor through law firm Messrs Paul Chong & Nathan.

    It was issued by the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on Jan 13 this year and extended for 12 months from April 13.

    An advertisement of the notice was published in The Star Friday giving the former Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department 21 days to apply to the court to set aside the notice, failing which he might be sued for bankruptcy.

    Contacted by Bernama about the notice, Tengku Adnan said: “My lawyers are looking into it.”

    — BERNAMA
    http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v3/news.php?id=168248

  65. An advertisement of the notice was published in The Star Friday giving the former Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department 21 days to apply to the court to set aside the notice, failing which he might be sued for bankruptcy.

    Contacted by Bernama about the notice, Tengku Adnan said: “My lawyers are looking into it.” – posted above

    It`ll be worthwhile checking out who his lawyer was then. It`ll be interesting.

  69. Forget AAB. You think UMNO is going to reform itself by enabling Malaysia “to get back on the path of true justice and integrity”? Fat hopes. Controlling the judiciary reinforces its right to steal.

  70. The question that resonates each time we read about the proceedings is why do we even have one.

    We hold inquiries to find out who the good guys are and the bad guys are. In this case we already know who they are – and there are no good guys here! Why do we go witch hunting when we already know who the witches are?

    The ‘ol fart, Mahathir has been allowed to hold members of the Commission at ransom when he failed to answer questions, pleading memory loss like as if twenty years have passed since the event. Has evidence deteriorated that much?

    Once again he is allowed to make a mockery of the judicial system. Who could blame him for having a low opinion about lawyers and the law? Even in his retirement he is able to make the government machinery run the way he wants it to run. He couldn’t do this without help from members of the Commission.

    Our judicial system is at the cross roads and members of the Commission its former members have only themselves to blame should they allow events to take the wrong turn. This is their last chance to search their conscience, and do the right thing.

    Why do Malaysians even bother with the search for the truth when the truth is already known?

    Our judiciary is corrupt. The practice of fixing judicial appointments has long been an accepted practice. Lawyers would seek out their ‘favorite’ judges to hear their cases.

    The identity of the players and the kind of role they play are public knowledge. The ‘video clip’ merely confirms it.

  72. Questioning of Mahathir by Commission members.

    He does not need a lawyer to advise him that the best response to most questions asked of him would be “I don’t recall”. Keep repeating that as many times as possible and even he will end up believing that he does not recall anything – not even his name??

  75. Camaraderie? More like birds of the same feather flock together.

    No one expects corrupt people to come before the RCI and openly admit “I did it.”

    It is up to the authorities to catch them if they want to as we certainly do have the authority and the capability.

    The major question is “Do We Have the Will?”
    It is a complex situation as some consider the members of the tribunal as being unsuitable.

    But some will protest. “What’s so complex? The whole system is corrupt!”

  76. I have set through countless court cases. Lie as much as you like but at the the tail end of the trial, the liar is always exposed.
    I reckon in this RCI, Mahathir will be exposed as a liar when Anwar takes the stand on Monday.
    The Tunku who looks like a MIC man will also be exposed.
    Ex CJ Dzaiddin will have more interesting things that will strip the liars naked. Just you wait.
    Lingam will be dead duck when he takes the stand unless he walks up drunk.

  77. ” Does anyone know whether a witness can be recalled to clarify earlier testimonies on a later date? I mean you can’t let a witness benefit from a ‘double jeopardy’ rule, right, Undergrad2? After all, this isn’t a court trial and the witness isn’t the offender.’ ENDANGERED HORNBILL

    Double jeopardy?? Nobody has been charged for any crime.

    We must remember that this is not a court proceeding when strict rules of evidence and procedure are applied. In a court proceeding, a witness could be re-called. Appropriate warning is given to the witness subject to re-call that he is still under oath, that he is to make himself available.

    This proceeding is much like the grand jury proceedings we find in some jurisdictions.

  78. Perhaps it is time we bring back the jury system. Anwar would have been found not guilty had the verdict been left to jurors.

    We should consider implementing the system followed in certain jurisdictions and have the grand jurors determine if there is any probable cause to charge a witness.

    “The primary function of the modern grand jury is to review the evidence presented by the prosecutor and determine whether there is probable cause to return an indictment.”

    http://www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html

    Then there is no need for Royal Commissions. Does anyone know how much it is costing the taxpayers?

  79. Double jeopardy in the context of grand jury proceedings? HORNBILL

    “If the grand jury refuses to return an indictment, can the prosecutor come back and try again, or is that barred by double jeopardy?

    Double jeopardy does not apply to the grand jury. In practice, however, it is uncommon for a prosecutor, having failed once, to try again without good reason. The Department of Justice requires the prosecutor to obtain permission of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division to present the case again. ”

    http://www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html

  80. This commission of wayang kulit is a waste of our money!! The current leadership has to make sure that nothing will come out of this, hence TDM will be ‘safe’. Even at this juncture, he still talks about Proton as a national pride!!! When the car was first exported to U.K.,a roll-roll terminal cum car handling operator from UK said that he offered to handle Protons for the agent. This was rejected. He could not understand why Proton wanted their own terminal and Pre-delivery center when they planned to sell only 10,000 units initially; after all he was already handling some 200,000 units for Volks and Renaults. So I told him not to waste his time with his logistics logic. They didnot want any of that. They had all planned out how to finish the allocated budget!
    After all these, Malaysians are still asked to support such nonsense.
    By the way, are his children driving any Proton around? I don’t think so, only Brabuses I believe. The saddest thing in this country is he still have many admirers!! And for this, I can only say it is our KARMA!!

  81. Actually reality proves to us that things are not done through the proper channels. The position of the Chief Justice is a big one. We only have to look at all the little flies in the public service and how they get to be employed by the government. Only a small percentage did it through the correct way. Application, interview and the job is yours. A big percentage uses the back door. If you don’t believe, just walk into any government departments and see which race dominates. The Malays, the Bumiputras and sometimes not even one miserable non Bumiputera. It is a lie to say that non Bumiputras are not interested in the civil service. The Bumiputras are helped because the civil service means security. Many Chineses are assumed to be rich which is not true at all. As such there is no need to employ them because they can make it on their own. Not just that. You find relatives working together, brothers and sisters working together. How nice. The court proceedings now is to know whether the Lingam tape is real or not. It is also to make sure that the Chief Justice must have what it takes to be the CJ and not just being appointed for some secret purposes.

  84. I suppose some of the forumers here are lawyers by profession. Was any witnesses called to testify here subjected to perjury, obstruction of justice which Mahathir stonewalling perfomances clearly reflected?

    If the witnesses is not subjected to perjury, then how could the truth enroute justice be assured considering some witnesses are of the higher-ups in the government department and having seen Mahathir’s deliberately stonewalling the Royal Commission and walk away scots-free, obviously, the Royal Commision members were clearly belittled and humiliated.

    Mahathir said of Anwar that he even has to engaged 7 or 9 lawyers
    during the high profile sodomy and misuse of power trial allegedly Mahathir has a hand in, but he (Mahathir) has appointed 3 lawyers to assist him now as a witness whom he singularly could have outdo all the Royal Commission of Enquiry members by saying that “I can’t recall” and let off with total impunity.

    I really find the Malaysian laws extremly ridiculous comparing to US law system.

  85. “If the witnesses is not subjected to perjury, then how…” hansome

    This is not a court proceeding but only a hearing held by a commission of inquiry the purpose of which is to establish if there is enough evidence to go forward to trial.

    If a witness commits perjury, the evidence can only be challenged when it goes to trial.

  86. “Mahathir …as a witness whom he singularly could have outdo all the Royal Commission of Enquiry members by saying that “I can’t recall” and let off with total impunity.

    Mahathir is not on trial. No one has been charged and no one is on trial. The purpose of the Commission is to find if there is evidence of any criminal wrongdoings and if there is enough evidence to go forward to trial.

    Something tells me that the Commission will not find enough evidence. So those who ‘perjured’ themselves during the hearing will not be proven to have perjured themselves since there is no trial.

  88. So we are now clear what this so called RCI is all about. Its an excuse to let off the guilty. So what now?

    I say DAP, PKR and Bar Council should petition the Aguing to stop this ridiculous sideshow. Its an insult to the Agung which could be illegal.

  89. This is in address of some issues raised in this forum.

    1. First the question of usefulness of the Royal Commission on Lingam Tape (“RC”). Understandably some have reservations – how much would it cost in terms of public funds? What’s the benefit on balance when witnesses showed poker face and gave poor testimonies like “I can’t remember” most of the time? Some more, there are misgivings on suitability of one or two one RC members having regard to their career records with questions raised whether they should recluse themselves. Some more (to aggravate misgivings of RC’s skeptics, terms of RC narrow, with one or two commissioners trying, for the cause of relevance, to limit scope and field of questioning of witnesses and extent of disclosure; there are also allegations of some witnesses being let off easily and treated with ‘kids glove’ and why spouses/family members are not called to contradict husband’s testimonies…So what’s the use of enquiry? After all one said “the practice of fixing judicial appointments has long been an accepted practice. Lawyers would seek out their ‘favorite’ judges to hear their cases”.

    2. I agree that many of the reservations and caveats expressed are legitimate. However I am of the opinion that it is premature and too soon at this juncture for us to adjudge or conclude the value of the RC and what good, on balance, it can bring us. After all, given the existing constraints, we the public were the ones who first clamoured for the govt to set up the RC in place of Haidar’s Panel of Enquiry and we should give it a chance rather than pour cold water on it.

    3. My sense is that the Common Cause in purging the Judiciary off its taint is not lost, as yet, with the RC, based so far on the transcripts of what occurred in the hearing, which at this stage is still “fact finding” and calling of witnesses.

    4. It is true that some questions were “kids glove” from predictably some questioners that we had doubts in the first instance whether their presence there was actually to facilitate the unraveling of the truth or to bury it. We might also suspect their impartiality having regard to their “career record”.

    But I must say we should not generalize. For example RC’s commissioner Mahadev Shanker’s questioning of former chief secretary Samsudin Osman was sharp, pointed and relevant. Also no one should ignore the fact that not only govt appointed RC’s commissioners are allowed to question.

    There are several interested parties and their lawyers present who are independent of govt and who are allowed to grill the witnesses. For examples Tun Dzaiddin’s lawyer Wong Chong Wah (senior litigator and partner in one of KL’s oldest and successful law firm), Bar Council’s lawyers Christopher Leong and Ranjit questioned TDM/Tun Eusoffe Chin. There are other lawyers present ready to get into action – eg Wee Choo Keong who is pressing for Lingam’s brother Thirunama Karasu to testify which the RC can delay but cannot afford denying him that opportunity. I would say that not just Malaysians but the whole world is watching this high profile public enquiry.

    Yes, it is ultimately govt’s call based on RC’s findings to determine whether it wants to take action and what action to take. But govt cannot stop facts from emerging in such an enquiry where independent parties and their lawyers have opportunity to participate! Yes also some in the hearing may try “damage control” to prevent certain facts from emerging. But there are also others present balancing them to ferret out the truth within parameters of RC’s frame of reference.

    5. It is to soon to make the call – on the verdict whether RC is of use or no use – because other key witnesses (eg Anwar, Thirunama Karasu, Vincent Tan & Fairuz) have yet to give their testimonies. Of course some witnesses would be inspired by TDM’s “I can’t remember” strategy but invariably some beans will spill…..As taikohtai quoted Mark Twain “If you tell the truth you don’t have to remember anything”. Even an inveterate deflector of issues/pointed questions like TDM could make a slip by volunteering info (eg he knew Lingam only recently in 2003) that painted himself in a narrow corner, vulnerable to future contradiction/rebuttal.

    6. At the end of the day, it is the aggregate of testimonies from all witnesses coming out to the light of day (facilitated by questioning by lawyers for independent parties) that counts; it is these testimonies which have to be weighed in relation to consistencies and inconsistencies and their probative value and the credibility of various witnesses. The scope by which our govt could operate to contain damage is subject to what is ultimately revealed in the RC hearing in which attempts by its sympathizers to contain certain facts from surfacing may not necessarily succeed.

    7. We should wait and see what happens then. It is not right at this juncture to involve and call anyone’s wife or children as witneses with the view of having them testify against and incriminate husband and father. That’s not right to undermine peoples family unity by such means when we have other methods – eg what lawyer Wee Cho Keong does in trying to get the RC to hear the testimony of Thirunama Karasu. So far, Mahadev Shanker only deferred RC’s consideration of the request till after Eusoffee Chin’s testimony. He did not say “No”. I can’t conceive how he can say “no” to Thirunama Karasu or any other witnesses coming forward to give relevant information. The RC would destroy its own credibility to reject such applications. So when there is such a public enquiry one cannot really be sure what’s going to surface now and in the near future. On balance I would think that the RC enquiry is, so far, a good thing or the best thing available given existing realities and constraints. It justifies its costs in public expenditure. Even if certain unsavoury aspects of Judiciary are alleged as common knowledge, and common place, what the RC eventually does may, in the public mind, help shorn or strip off official pretensions or claims to the contrary.

  90. The value of the RC – and its findings – then lies more in what the hearing eventually discloses from the testimonies, especialy the many undisclosed stories behind the scenes. If the RC & its findings could in public mind convincingly rebut the official claims to Judicial independence, the RC would have served its purpose.

    What the govt will next do based on RC’s findings, whether appropriate remedial actions or otherwise (just ignore) is of course its call alone to make, and entirely a separate issue. Malaysians cannot control what the govt would do or not do but we can judge its actions and also take our own appropriate steps of what to do when we vote.

  92. mahathir must be very shame of himself for betraying / undermining the malaysian legal system unlike the white leaders in the west.

    mahathir proved that he is no better than his ex-counterparts in africa.

    shame on you —- liar

  94. Based on what is reported in MSM, it appears that some of the commissioners have not questioned any of the witnesses – ie they seem to be only making up the numbers.

    Jeffrey is right.
    The RCI by itself will not settle any of Malaysia’s many problems. What the government does with the findings is more important.

    Perhaps we should ask the government to defer elections untill 3 months after the RCI report has been published to see how sincere the government is with respect to putting things right in the nation.

    If the report comes out within 2 months with a “Everyone has forgotten and there is no solid proof” type of conclusion so therefore so further action necessary.” and the GE is then rushed through we know the authorities are just not interested to seek the truth.

  96. “We should wait and see what happens then. It is not right at this juncture to involve and call anyone’s wife or children as witneses with the view of having them testify against and incriminate husband and father.” Jeffrey

    You cannot force a wife to testify against the husband and vice versa. Common law rule against that.

    This is not a court hearing. The issue of perjury will have to wait until trial – if there’s going to be one. Don’t think there will be one.

  98. “Under the Federal Constitution, High Court judges, the chief judge of Malaya, the chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak, the chief justice and the president of the Court of Appeal are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong under the advice of the prime minister after consulting the Conference of Rulers and the chief justice.“

    If so how could Mr.Vincent Tan be consulted on the appointment?
    Tun Mahathai can only consult the CJ.

  100. “Malaysians cannot control what the govt would do or not do but we can judge its actions and also take our own appropriate steps of what to do when we vote.” Jeffrey

    Exactly. There seems to be no short of ideas, anger, humiliation, etc but in the final analyis “how do we act?”

    Translate words into deeds. Influence your friends. Print out and distribute some of the highlights of YB Lim’s speeches, deleting your own comment, of course. YB Lim’s speeches are already public, but limited audience because of “report silence” by the media. You have to be careful about your own comments though.

    Do whatever you could, in big and small ways.

    Best regards.

  102. RCI panel members ought to flash their acid tongues when it is patent witnesses are spewing fudging nonsense.

    For example, when Tun M keeps saying “I can’t remember”, RCI members could have said: “What do you then remember about events since 2000?” Such a whiplash could snap the old head back into memory mode.

    RCI can’t behave like obeisant wage earners! There is a difference between plain politeness and civility in high office where a nuclear device must be recognised for what it is and not treated like a firecracker. Call a nuclear device a nuclear device and a spade, a spade.

    The radioactivity of this RCI has a half-life that may extend centuries hence. So, come off it, RCI! This isn’t an ordinary balik-kampung crossroads; the impact will last generations & doom the prospects of a nation.

  103. They don`t care about generations to come, but the here and now. They owe their appointments to the Govt. It is their sodden duty to protect the powers in place.
    Another RCI will have to be appointed when and if the Govt changes. Don`t expect anything from this one.

  104. these 2 tuns are a bunch of liars. one says i cant remember or recall whilst the other says i cant understand. hey look here, the 2 of you are now behaving like idiots. you are taking us, the public at large as suckers. you 2 are lying through your teeth. liars. liars and liars. are we going to see more liars? the answer is yes with lingam and vincent tan accommodated by some condescending panel members.

  105. Jan 17, 2008
    M’sia’s Mahathir says he personally chose judges

    http://www.straitstimes.com/Latest%2BNews/Asia/STIStory_197216.html?vgnmr=1

    Remember:
    Mahathir is a non-lawyer.
    Mahathir has little respects for either the law or lawyers.

    So when the non-lawyer MAhathir chooses lawyers for judges, he need not choose lawyers who respect the law or judges who respect lawyers; leave alone skills in lawyering, save the layering.

  106. There is also a saying “A liar must have a good memory”.
    Eusoff said “When the man puts his hand on your shoulder, you can’t simply shove it aside”.
    But then it was his hand on Lingam’s shoulder.
    He said he bumped into Lingam but we can see as daylight that it was a joint holiday.
    The RCI can say what it likes at the close of the hearing and government can do what it likes with the RCI Findings or just sit on it.
    What matters most is the “COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION.”
    Let’s not forget that the world is watching.

  108. “What matters most is the “COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION.”

    Yes, but what can the court of public opinion do?? It is not like we do not know of the practice of fixing judicial appointments. It is not like we do know the judiciary has long lost its independence and is corrupt.

    We do not need any royal commission to tell us what we already know.

  113. Saturday January 19, 2008
    [ ]
    Earlier Thirunama had told reporters outside the courtroom that he knew about the New Zealand trip on which his brother and Eusoff had gone.

    Counsel Wee Choo Keong said the panel was finding excuses. “By right the commission must hear him first as he can show Lingam’s close links with judges and Eusoff.

    “Thirunama had driven Lingam to Eusoff’s house at night to deliver bags and other things,” Wee claimed.
    http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/1/19/nation/20061648&sec=nation

  114. A Tribute to Lawyer Lingam

    Six surgeons were sitting at a conference discussing their favourite patients when the first stated that he especially enjoyed operating on poets and artists because…

    “When I cut them open, they are filled with beautiful colours and the operating room is bathed in their light.”

    “No No!” said the second surgeon, “I prefer operating on accountants. Inside them, everything is neat and orderly and all the parts are numbered.”

    “Nah,” said the third surgeon, “librarians are by far the best. Everything inside them is ordered alphabetically.”

    The fourth responds: “Fellas, you should try electricians! Everything inside them is colour coded!”

    The fifth intercedes: “Personally, I prefer engineers. They always understand when you have a few parts left over at the end.”

    “You’re all wrong,” said the sixth surgeon, “The best are lawyers. No guts, no spine, no heart…in fact, they only have two parts – their mouths and their rears, and both of those are interchangeable!”

  115. More laughs here:

    Eusoffe Chin was at Changi Airport waiting for his connecting flight to New Zealand. If VK Lingam and family ‘just happened’ to also be at Changi Airport, how does Lingam instantly get tickets for his whole family on the same flight as Eusoffe Chin to New Zealand? Visa semua on standby kah? And what about VK Lingam’s own travel plans? Surely he and his wife were at Changi enroute to somewhere. Does Eusoffe expect us to believe that VK Lingam and his wife just cancelled their own flight plans to join him and his family to New Zealand on a ‘spur of the moment’?

    The picture of VK Lingam and Eusoffe Chin and wives in New Zealand shows them wearing warm clothing. They went to New Zealand prepared for the cold weather. Does Eusoffe Chin also expect us to believe that VK Lingam also travels around fully packed and ready with warm winter clothing?

    Kawan-kawan VK Lingam is fully informed about the testimony at this Royal Commission. He is also listening carefully and preparing his answers also very carefully. So guess what VK Lingam will say about this New Zealand holiday when it is his turn to testify? Lingam will say, ‘Yes lah. My wife and I were just hanging around Changi Airport lah. Sometimes after having twenty five whisky waters we do things like that lah. We pack our winter clothes, go to Changi Airport and see who we can bump into lah.’

    http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/1418/46/

  116. So we all know that the Judiciary is corrupt to the core, and that appointments were made on the basis of who you know rather than what you know. We also know that Mahathir ran the judicial appointments at his personal prerogative, and that he brooked no dissent. We can also infer that Badawi is not going to “right” the wrongs of the past, judging by his ill-considered attempts to push certain appointments through only recently, and that judicial appointments under Badawi will be also be made on the basis of party considerations.

    So what do we do ? Asking our friends to vote the Opposition is one thing, but what can the leadership of the Opposition do to galvanise public support and public awareness ? Can the Opposition parties even agree to produce a multi-lingual leaflet explaining the consequences of a judiciary beholden to UMNO ? I am not entirely sure that the average person on the street cares about the rot in the Judiciary or understands the impact on his/her lifestyle.

  117. bodowi is not so bodoh or sleepy after all? is there any possibility that he is using this opportunity to shut tdm’s mouth once and for all so that tdm will forever from now be grateful to him? this will only strengthen his grip on umno and his presidency at least for another 4 years.

  118. The drama before us is indeed fascinating ! When they lied,
    they are more reasons to cover that which was spoken.
    ” Melayu mudah lupa ” and the response was ” Mahathir
    mudah lupa.” We do not need a rocket scientist to teach
    us how to analyse each spoken words by them that lied.
    You can see it from their face and eye expression or body
    language, so to speak.

    It is said that it takes only a moment to find extraordinary
    liars, an hour to appreciate those lies, a day to loathe them
    and a lifetime never to forget them. What a legacy left for
    our next generation !!!!!

    Apparently, there are more juicy part coming along and let
    us just “hold our horse” before concluding what the RCI can
    or cannot do. Not to generalise but do not believe that the
    “script” can be rewritten? Nonetheless, what they spew out
    were certainly not palatable but let us enjoy and savors
    every moment of the whole show.

    When they are not speaking the truth, they are showing us
    that they are mentally and spiritually ” handicap.”

    We all know that they are the fruits from the same old tree
    (umno cum bn) and what good can we expect out of it ?

  119. Godfather, AAB is not going to reverse anything, neither is he interested in redeeming himself against negative public perceptions. At first I thought AAB is really “inept”, that the word you used to say, but if you look carefully, he knows exactly where he wants to bring Malaysia into. Judicial rot, shambled public safety, tolerance against corrupted ministers and officers, protection upon “little Mullahs and Napoleons,” insensitive religious edicts – these are in fact his deliberate schemes.

    What is still hidden is his purpose. Here in this blog we scream ourselves hoarse against what we normally perceived as injustices or corruptions, and we thought that AAB is really the sleeping PM. We are wrong.

    A glimpse of the hidden purpose was said in Madrid. He said there is not separation between religion and state. That means we are going to be ruled by Mullahs. Mullah cannot come in if our judiciary system is working. That must be destroyed first.

    Then public safety is going to be destroyed with kidnappings and killings. He needed that before he could impose Islamic laws. His argument would be that the present system is not working and needed to be revamped. The Hudud would be introduced.

    The corrupted Ministers are also his plan. Corruption will reach a level where he publicly announces an abolition of the parliamentary system. Ministers would be appointed through the Board of Mullahs. We see a testing of this system through the “little Mullahs.” Only DAP protested, if you notice and he knows DAP cannot form the majority in this election.

    Once this is in place, he will revamp the economic system. That would be easy because there would be nothing that can legally hold him. He would devalue the ringgit, cancel debts of UMNO-related borrowings and place the Monetary Policy under Syariah. In an instant the wealth of the Chinese would be gone.

    Godfather, he is smarter than what we thought.

  120. Eusoffe Chin had a hard time during questioning. He was trying his best to show VK Lingam did not organise, pre-arrange and pay for his family’s trip in NZ. His only explanation was that they chanced met each other at Changi Airport and after that Lingam tagged all the way, which he (Eusoffe) was too polite to tell him otherwise. Eusoffe could not answer why, as a matter of judicial propriety and ethics, he ought not to allow Lingam to tag along. A judge’s impartiality must not only be upheld but seen upheld : so pally paly with lawyer in such vacation is a no no! Situation was so pathetic, Eusoffe so shaken up that RC gave him reprieve to appoint a counsel to assist his testimonies. This Eusoffe is of course no Judge Eusofee Abdoolcader. Had it been the latter, he would have so engaged the cross-examiner that the cross examiner would be the one who had to ask for recess to recuperate his wits.

  121. Today, he showed the world his true colors!

    Most men his age at 82, sees the need to repent and I believe as Muslims they want to go “clean” when their time comes for them to meet their “creator” but Mahathir sees no urgency in that.

    He has offended, destroyed and ripped the lives of many Malaysians in his 22 years reign. It is still not too late for him to repent and apologies from him though overdue, is still better late than never.

  122. “…that the cross examiner would be the one who had to ask for recess to recuperate his wits.” Jeffrey

    Ha..ha..how so true and well observed; good point too about the

    “as a matter of judicial propriety and ethics….judge’s impartiality must not only be upheld but seen upheld”

  123. Looking beyond the immediate excitement of the RC’s proceedings into the broader spaces of the nation’s future, there is really basis for optimism.

    The crux of the malaise afflicting country in different forms is the wholesale rejection of Meritocracy in everything we do.

    The politicians in power have denigrated Meritocracy in favour of race and religion as a basis for considering appointments of official and important positions which determine the fate of the nation.

    The problem is that these bunch of ruling politicians cannot be evicted by ballot box because, by the ballot box process, sections comprised of the majority voters support their policies based on race and religion and abhor the mere mention of the word “meritocracy”.

    They have insecurities that they will lose out where merits are introduced. That is the bane of ouir national destiny. Until such mindset is changed there is but only one way the country will go – down the chute.

    The biggest battle is the one for the hearts and minds of the majority esp- in rural heartland – race/religion or meritocracy? If it’s the first (race/religion) continuing to next millennium, then the country (just like diarrhea in food poisoning) will have to get very much worse before it gets better (which btw may take eons).

    Even if the RC does its job professionally, ferret out the fact of corruption in Judiciary, nothing really changes without meritocracy.

    The reason is plain to see. For a judge to assert independence consistent with the highest judicial traditions, he must first of all be a person of merits – merits in terms of knowledge of the law, pride of his profession and its tradition, pride in his own integrity and what he could contribute in terms of legacy of his life’s work for the community he serves.

    But when a judge is selected and sits there not on the merit principle, then what criteria is left for apointing him?

    Sure there is criteria of race and religion. But people competing for the same position also have the same race and religion. So what extra does one have?

    Well one is connection to Power. One tells Power “give me the job” and I’ll do your bidding in all cases where Power has an interest.

    OK job is given & position secured. How to execute the job of judge when one has no merits? Surely “show” of doing judicial work must go on.

    Solution simple :

    Delay writing judgments. Not just due to laziness or other better things to do but simply don’t know how to write!

    But what about those in remand languishing in jail waiting for one’s written judgment for appeal? Solution : Get other judges to write and one just say “I concur” “I concur”….

    Once upon a time we had the likes of Eusoffe Abdoolcader on the bench to help write erudite judgments for those who could not write (and often could not even think). Now no more of such specimens on further onward march of political appointments based on race, religion, creed and political affiliation rather than merits. So how again?

    Solution : get friendly lawyer in private practice on the side to give legal authorities, advise and sometimes help write one’s judgment.
    Its Cut and Paste job.

    Now lawyer here is very willing to help to put judge in obligation. Can’t blame lawyer who is not holding public trust position. He can fetch a better fee from clients, telling them, “sure, I can win this case” because he knows the right judge will be fixed to hear his case. He does even need to know the law that well – as Anwar once sarcastically said once, a good lawyer is one who knows the right judge!

    The situation is ‘lagi more “win win” ‘ if the lawyer with whom one collaborates has direct or indirect access to powers that-be.

    Through him you could get Powers-That-be to give you the top position. Need his help because one has no merits to commend oneself and neither is the Power-that be interested in merits. Subservience and compliance to dictates of power is more valued.

    Through the connected lawyer, one can get one’s own cronies and gang to also fill up and move up hierarchy of Judiciary. Then one’s control over the 3rd branch of government – Judiciary – is complete. Everything boleh from then on.

    Decision can be given any way one’s lawyer friend wants it, for whatever consideration, because one’s ‘gang’ within judiciary beholden to one for their positions will do one’s bidding.

    In turn one prostrates and does the bidding as Powers-that-be or broker lawyer wants it, quid pro quo, and everyone happy with the way the patronage system works.

    From that hypothetical situation outlined of how corruption sets in, isn’t it true that the first Cause of Corruption and Mother of all Causes for the country’s steady decline is the fact that persons appointed to the top of whatever positions running the country (whether Judiciary, Ministries, Civil Service, Uniformed Services, GLCs to even Schools) are appointed on the basis of every other reason (patrtonage, conection, race, religion, creed) OTHER THAN MERITS?

    When you put merits as lowest in priority how can the country be run meritoriously? Singapore’s performance surpassing us is because the government embraces Meritocracy – and Excellence. There can be no other standard in substitution.

    The intractable problem is that there are an overwhelming majority, whose numbers are increasing, that are prepared to pay the price of having third and fourth rates leaders and administrators and judges and countenance the nation’s decline just so that Merits and Excellence are pushed to background, and take not the priority place of race, religion, creed and political affliliation.

    Therein lies, ultimately, the root of the problem, that is not resolved and cannot be resolved.

  127. “….the nation’s decline just so that Merits and Excellence are pushed to background, and take not the priority place of race, religion, creed and political affliliation.” Jeffrey

    As I mentioned above, it is deliberately orchestrated. Did we see it coming. I didn’t.

  128. Yeah you may be right oknyua!

    His creator does not want him back yet. It won’t be that easy an escape for him; he needs to live a while longer to watch this nation down the chute in total collapse due to his masterplan.

  130. Jeffrey,excellent analysis.Hopefully people who are responsible for putting the country in the current pathetic situation can read your comments and revamp the whole regressive system which is debilitating the nation.

  131. Same thing as education, they know how to clean up judiciary, but political obstacles too big. Race/Religion or Skill / Merit ?? Doing things again law of nature (ie Not Merit for Right job) will back fire sooner or later.

  132. Seriously if they don’t handle the RCI right, Haidar is allowed to lead Members of the Panel to continue to look pretty sitting there, hang the whistle-blower/s to protect the guilty, the end is near for Malaysia!

  135. DEar Jong.

    I refer to your insulting remarks on Dr Mahathir. Now what a nasty thing to say. Let us not jugde or as what Malay said “jangan buruk sangka”.

    Surely, from bottom of your heart, you cant deny the contribution he made during his tenure as PM. Rest assured, majority believe him. If not, how his govt won every elections.

    As I find his statement is simple but crystally clear. As the then PM, he had the right to appoint anybody he deemed suitable to the post of CJ. That is his prerogative.

    Any “mabuk’ guy can claim to have influence on him or close to him.

  136. If the current Malaysia is as per past ten years before no one would condemn TDM. Since it’s otherwise now, every single moves which were supposed for Malaysian (or bumiputra’s) good takeN by TDM AT that time exposing out now as terrible destructive motives.
    That’s why some intelectual always say : TRUTH PREVAILS.
    Good and hard lesson for any current or future ‘Malaysian Politicians’.

  137. “As I find his statement is simple but crystally clear. As the then PM, he had the right to appoint anybody he deemed suitable to the post of CJ. That is his prerogative.” Shamshu Anuar

    I thought as PM he was supposed to consult senior members of the bench and the Bar Council. Finally, of course, it is his decision to make and for the Agong to be “advised”. If that is what he meant by “his prerogative” I’d have to agree.

  138. Dear shamshul anuar,

    The way Dr Mahathir behaved and carried himself at RCI was highly irresponsibe and displayed sheer arrogance! He forgot he was under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth nothing but the truth.

    He must not be allowed to practise ‘selective amnesia’ and get away with answers like “I cannot remember” fourteen times during the 90 mins testimony, because the very day he stepped out of PM office, he is an ordinary citizen!

    Yes, it’s his “perogative” aptly said, but see what happens when it’s left to this highly power executive?! An independent Judiciary Commission is urgently warranted and of utmost importance to look into the selection, appointment and promotion of judges. There should be transparency, accountability and clear separation of powers in governance!

    Members of the Commission headed by Haidar Mohamad Noor should have stood up to remind him that he was no more in-charge but to expect them to do so is asking too much I guess, afterall every right-thinking Malaysians know that they are not truly independent, or are they?

  140. “He forgot he was under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth nothing but the truth.” Jong

    Not remembering is not perjury.

    Perhaps he should seek protection under the common law rule against self-incrimination and refusing to answer some of the questions but then he is not on trial.

    But if he says something not believing in its truth or reckless as to its truth then that is a matter which goes to his credibility.

  141. “This country is collapsing, every facet of it! We can’t do one thing right, not even properly conducting a Royal Commission of enquiry.” limkamput

    Are you that naive as to believe that?? That they do not know how to conduct hearings? The intention here is to derail any effort at bringing the matter to trial – and they are doing quite well so far.

  142. “As I find his statement is simple but crystally clear. As the then PM, he had the right to appoint anybody he deemed suitable to the post of CJ. That is his prerogative.” Shamshul Anuar

    It is the way he uses that prerogative that is the issue.

  145. Dear Shamshul,

    I am also an admirer of TDM, but a wrong is a wrong no matter how much he has “positively” contributed to the country. As much as he has done good for the country, he has also created many “white and mouldy elephants” such as the Dayabumi, Twin Towers, MSC, KLIA, Putrajaya, not to mention many other scandalous projects and schemes. Such wrongs costs us taxpayers lots, but unless, you are one such who are privileged to be exempted from this moral obligation.

  146. “Such wrongs costs us taxpayers lots, but unless, you are one such who are privileged to be exempted from this moral obligation.”

    An understatement no doubt. These wasteful spending will be a burden for our grandchildren to carry for the rest of their lives, and their children the rest of theirs.

  148. The intention here is to derail any effort at bringing the matter to trial – and they are doing quite well so far. BlackEye

    Oh, thank you for being so discerning and insightful. Sorry I don’t know about that, thank you for telling me. I guess you will never know what is doing the right things and what is doing things right. To you, it does not matter whether we are doing the right things, so long as we doing it right.

  149. Now that you ask, be the first to answer. colonel

    It is just an expression of despair. Besides, I guess we can all ask questions which we have no answers. So may I ask why must I be the first to answer? Since you are so keen for the answer, you can be the first one to answer. Let’s hear what you have got to say.

  151. I just find it odd PM has lots of prerogatives to do this and that – to appoint judges, to decide on election date, to appoint cabinet ministers etc. Even the constitution said so, can we not argue that all these all so archaic. I guess we have too many lawyers or lawyer wannabes here. We are just happy to restate again and again the confine of the constitution, never mind all these have given us little hope and avenue for change.

  152. “We are just happy to restate again and again the confine of the constitution, never mind all these have given us little hope and avenue for change.” limkamput

    However we may disagree with certain provisions in the Constitution, it is still law! There is still the Constitution the supreme law of the federation.

    Are you suggesting we ignore the law? What do you suggest we do? Take Eusoff Chin and Lingam and string them up the nearest tree?

    The reason why we are having Royal Commission hearings is because we depend on the rule of law to bring justice.

    Don’t be a smart ass!

  153. There is no point in being frustrated with “lawyers or lawyer wannabes here” who are “happy to restate again and again the confine of the constitution, never mind all these have given us little hope and avenue for change” because fundamentally there are only two courses of action : one either upholds the Constitution on the premise that this is a society based on the Rule of Law & Democratic election/Ballot Box (even if true, the voice of majority is not always the voice of equality or justice and the Majority could use voting majority to marginalise or oppress the Minorities) or the other way is to ignore and disregard the Constitution which second other way is akin to the Revolutionary’s Way (which some say is to descend to violence and anarchy). For that other way purports to claim higher moral considerations over the Constitution and unjust laws made from it. It is the way that says the Constitution and laws are oppressive, so lets flout them (like Hindraf). It is the way that denigrates and looks down on piecemeal negotiation and actions that supposedly leads to no where and no justice. It is a way of the impatient that wants to tear the whole political system and fabric down wholesale to be replaced by an Utopian blueprint. It is the call of Ernesto Che Guevara; the way of Robespierre in the French Revolution that led to the Reign of Terror; the Lenin’s way that led to the Russian Revolution, the way of LTTE separatist Tamils in Sri Lanka and those of Mindanao Muslims in South Phillippines and that of Castro. To be fair, some revolutions in history have brought good and justice – like the American Revolution against the yoke of British Colonialism or that of the Indians by Gandhi’s Civil Disobedience against British colonialism.

    All revolution involves some degree a call to arms and begets violence in return. Under present civilised norms and international law people taklk of democatic evolution and change – not revoluntary change disregarding Constitution and law. Read Karl Popper’s book on “Open Society and its Enemies” for more on this two conflicting approaches and their dangers.

  156. Democracy and constitutionality work so long all parties subscribe to the same rules. Just look around us. For how long have the people in Myanmar suffered? The world knows about it, ASEAN talks about it and the people I am sure in many countries want to see the situation changed in Myanmar. Give the Junta time, give them space, and give democracy the opportunity to work. And you see what happens. The government continues to abuse and subjugate their people. Don’t be too sure all these will not gradually happen elsewhere if nothing is done fast enough to reverse the course.

  157. The reason why we are having Royal Commission hearings is because we depend on the rule of law to bring justice. darkhorse

    Then I suggest you don’t complain RCI is unfair here and there. Just shut up and wait for the obvious outcome.

  161. Mr. Lim Kam Put, we understand your comments are directed towards Jeffery QC because of his writings on the law.

    Jeffrey QC like you have not received any legal training but Jeffrey unlike you, uses what he knows about the law from the layman’s point of view to share his 2-cents on the issues. And for that and for the trouble he takes posters here are appreciative of his effort. You, on the other hand, merely want to put him and those like him down by referring to him and those like him as a “lawyer wannabe” etc.

    To you if posters don’t agree with you, they must shut up. Why should they?

    We may disagree with the law. But it is still law. We may disagree with the Constitution but it is still the supreme law. The rule of law in Malaysia may not be much of a rule of law as understood in western democracies because of the abuse of the law by the executive. But the rule of law is an institution which we subscribe to and are committed to preserving.

  162. Ya, I guess we can all go ahead subscribing to the rule of law and adhering to the constitution. I guess it is pointless to say much more. The government has been fair because it subscribes to the rule of law. The government has not abused or committed any excesses because everything is done within the confine of the constitution – the supreme law of the land, is it article 5? I am so sorry for causing distress and discomfort. I thought I was expressing my opinion just like anyone else here. At least I did not start to call others smart ass first.

  165. and you call this posting you made an opinioin??????
    “Don’t be a smart ass!”
    That is why i keep saying you can’t see your own irony. I hope you really understand what I have been trying to tell you for many times and for a long time.

  166. That is the poster telling you exactly what you’re to him i.e. a “smart ass”. It is not meant to be an opinion. What precedes that is his opinion.

    By the way what has that got to do with me??

  168. So how about responding to undergrad’s comments:

    “Mr. Lim Kam Put, we understand your comments are directed towards Jeffery QC because of his writings on the law.

    Jeffrey QC like you have not received any legal training but Jeffrey unlike you, uses what he knows about the law from the layman’s point of view to share his 2-cents on the issues. And for that and for the trouble he takes posters here are appreciative of his effort. You, on the other hand, merely want to put him and those like him down by referring to him and those like him as a “lawyer wannabe” etc.

    To you if posters don’t agree with you, they must shut up. Why should they?”

    You see, there are more than one who thinks you’re living up to your reputation as a smart ass.

  169. Mr. Darkhorse,
    If I am a smart ass, it is for a simple reason that I speak up what I think and feel. If that affects some of you, there is nothing much I can do. This blog does not belong to you, Jeffrey, undergrad2 or colonel. I am entitled to my opinion as much as many of you. I can’t help but feel that this blog has been turned into a “tutorial class” in law. I think it is too excessive already. That is why I put forth my comments the way I did. By doing that, if I am a smart ass, then I guess some of you are egoistic smart asses. May be some of you have held sway in the blog for too long and are not used to pointed comments from others. Please judge my overall comments and posting, and please don’t pick one or two lines to “out contextualise” the whole issue. If we keep doing this, it shows a lot of our own intellectual honesty. As you have alluded to earlier, we can be whoever we want to be. But in the final analysis, I just want to say this: I can’t be bullied and I do not wish to bully others. I have more than responded to Jeffrey’s and Undergrad2 challenges, if you care to read properly. I need not say further. Just like all of you are not accountable to me, I am not accountable to you. My comments are for others to read, not just you, Jeffrey, undergrad2, colonel or laifoong.

  170. Since you people want my specific response, I shall do it, but for this time only.
    (i)It is a way of the impatient that wants to tear the whole political system and fabric down wholesale to be replaced by an Utopian blueprint.

    The Hindraf got the Thaipusum holiday within few weeks. Ask MIC how many years they have taken and still failed.

    (ii)It is the call of Ernesto Che Guevara; the way of Robespierre in the French Revolution that led to the Reign of Terror;

    So convenient the argument. No French Revolution, no liberty, equality, and fraternity, may be even till today. Without Lenin and others, may be the capitalism we see today may have taken entirely different forms

    (iii)Good you have pointed the American Revolution and Civil Disobedience.

    (iv)I have also showed you what is happening in Myanmar. We shall wait how long it takes to see change in Myanmar.

  172. It is time you boys leave this lamkamphurt alone. He misread Kit’s remarks and was emboldened by it only to find that it is all a misunderstanding on his part. His postings continue to be deleted.

    Poor bloke!

Leave a Reply