Screenshots

no thanks.

i don't want to get kicked by PRDM, sprayed by FRU water cannons, shot by .38 S/W or runover by ACV 300 Adnan. Maybe will recommend to other malaysian patriot (i don't think i have any).

I think the defacto Law Minister has provided much added basis for the March in Putrajaya to push for the restoration if the Judiciary to its rightful place as one of the equal pillars of democracy.

The PM has to make clear his stand on this issue of whether the Judiciary is an equal component, as opposed to subordinate.

And Nazri, a trained lawyer no less, must be censured by Pak Lah if the PM wants to show that he knows what democarcy means.

If he does not, then the PM may well have hammered another big nail into BN's coffin come the next general elections.

And the growing outcry for the Malay Sultans to step in to restore the nation back to its correct path can only grow louder.

A Consitutional crisis may not be a confrontation that UMNO can afford or win.

What the "law minister" has said tantamounts to political "kow-tow" and patronage by the Judge!

If it is true, then this judge have failed to show the integrity and powers vested in him by the institution and the doctrine of Separation of powers and the principle of check and balance is lost! And I strongly believe that if the PM does not act with integrity this round, he would have lost all sense justice, integrity and honour that his post requires - to hold the respect of the Rakyat - and ironically, whats left is political patronage which helps him cling on to power.

And what this Prime Minister needs now is historians in his pocket to make people remember as a Prime Minister who has truly done something meaningful for the people who has voted him in, if he remains the way he is now. If the Minister still have any strand of good sense in him, he should ignore all the money and power-crazed politicians and do good for once.

1- senang nye menjadi pemerintah di Malaysia, tanpa rasa tanggungjawab kepada negara, rakyat dan agama. Org2 politik kuat berslogan tata negara tapi realiti nya mereka jadi Raja Negara, above the LAW. Apa bila ada rakyat yang "demand transparency dalam judiciary" dengan bukti2 kukuh, mereka diselar sebagai penderhaka atau pembangkang.

2- Senang lah jadi pemerintah, sikit2 kata " kami deny" tanpa sebarang bukti. Then the police can easily said that the video is a flaw - fabricated by opposition party (with direction from PM, Snr Ministers).

3- Memang sakit hati menjadi rakyat Msia atas kerenah2 politikus yang tidak percaya kepada hari pembalasan.

4- the walk by lawyers and all Msian is a must for ALL Malaysian... I cant join since I am away from the country (perhaps for good..).

JEFF OOI says" Perhaps I should book Air Qatar instead? ;-)

5- I salute Jeff Ooi and Rocky and many others for their bravery to uphold Malaysian integrity as our state (not UMNO, not MCA, not perikatan state whatso ever..) !!

It's some walk; maybe they should sing some song while doing so:

Beautiful Malaysia

(credit to whoever took time and trouble to craft this gem)

This is a story about Malaysian society
Where the different races supposedly live in harmony
In 2003, came along a Prime Minister by the name of Dato' Seri Abdullah Badawi
Who led his party to a resounding election victory.

This is a PM whose promises are many
All his slogans are equally catchy
As a result, many people are taken in completely
By his humble and Mr. Clean personality.

First among his chief promises is to combat corruption immediately
That has everyone applauding loudly
But until today, all the major cases are still one big mystery
Lack of evidence or is he fooling us secretly?

Not long after, he introduced Islam Hadhari
Some complained there is only one version of Islam from the Almighty
Anyway, what is it all about, no one knows exactly
Except for some broad points outlined in theory.

Then, he said we need to cut our budget deficit quickly
Which started the dismantling of Tun M's legacy
This caused us to hear about the crooked bridge flip flop story
With all the accusations, what is fiction and what is reality?

By his own admission, his son is extremely wealthy
Because he controls a listed company by the name of Scomi
Was once implicated in the shipment of banned components to a Middle
Eastern country
But his son claimed ignorance and that's the end of the story.

He also has a son-in-law by the name of Khairy
Not elected but is UMNO Youth's deputy
Got entangled in the merged Avenue-ECM Libra entity
Which happened right under the nose of the PM-led Finance Ministry.

Then, we came across a foreign newspaper reporting factually
Of his adventure to see a yacht at a faraway place somewhere in Turkey
This is not true, he said insistently
But I don't see the newspaper issuing any apology.

Next, came the jet on the itinerary
Bought or leased, he is lucky that Malaysians are not financially savvy
The jet is also for the Agong's use, he said publicly
I wonder whether the Agong requested for one specifically?

Later, we read of his holidays in an Australian city
Staying in a mansion owned by someone whom an old man named as Patrick Badawi
We shouldn't be so critical if he was only away temporarily
Except for the fact that there was a major flood in our own territory.

Then, we get the case of Proton disposing off a subsidiary
Not for a large amount but for a mere penny
Many think behind the deal something's very fishy
Tun M's pet project is certainly going awry.

Overall, crime rates are going up highly
Confidence in our police is at its lowest historically
But the IGP got his tenure extended easily
He must be thinking everything's hunky-dory.

He has also been busy launching economic regions lately
Trying to attract foreign investments into the country
Sadly, some are saying that the northern development is benefiting a crony
While others argue the southern one will end up as LKY's colony.

You see, I can go on and on about this indefinitely
Because it is easy and I do not need to create any of them individually
They are all plucked from the web where the stories about him is a plenty
>From promoting judges unfairly to always being sleepy.

Actually, I am just an ordinary Malaysian who cares about her country
And I have to state that I am not against him or his policy
For I do not care who is the Perdana Menteri
As long as the person is capable and trustworthy.

melurian

You are benefiting from other people's fight.

That is called a societal parasite.

Clever-by-half Head-kicker Minister Nazri confirms one thing:

This is a Govt AGAINST the People, Not a Government FOR the People.

A lawyer who is a disgrace to his profession and a disgrace to the nation.

Nazri embodies the absolute arrogance of UMNO.

If Badawi, Nazri and company can throw cold water on the tape by saying the other party wasn't seen, the same can be said of Nazri answering on behalf of the said other party. The rakyat didn't see the other party say it to Nazri.

What is so difficult about approving an independent investigation into the veracity of this evidence?

Doesn't this particular government think that at stake is the very integrity of this nation?

How can it say that any attempt to ask for an investigation is an attack on the integrity of the judiciary when in the first place the purpose of the investigation is to investigate whether the judiciary concerned has been appointed under practices of integrity?

How can it label such an action by concerned citizens of this country as being tainted by political considerations when the very act of labelling it is already an act of political consideration for if it is not, why should a minister under the executive arm of a particular political party reply on behalf a member of the judiciary arm which is supposed to be independent one from the other? Surely the said minister didn't reply on behalf of the opposition?

Doesn't the fact that answering on behalf of the other party calls to question the independence of the executive as regards the matter of initiating the process of an independent investigation, in which case how can the result of the investigation if ending in the negative be accepted intoto by anyone and everyone?

Why doesn't the other party answer for himself, since the very post he holds would make his word synonymous with what one still holds to associate with integrity, and if he has answered noncommitally one day, why did he presumably answer committally the next?

Why must the executive arm chastise an exposure if it was made to the media first before to the executive arm unless the said executive thinks that the media should not be allowed to receive information that would show that integrity of the executive has been tainted?

Is politics supreme in a court of justice in this country?

Would Badawi shy away from the March come that day and forget that the very peoples from all those countries which had attended his garden party would now be waiting to see how he would act regarding the upholding of the independence of justice in this country?

If someone goes to court on a charge by any vested party, does he make an oath without fear that favour would have been promised to the judge who presides his case because that judge has been appointed by the same vested parties?

If those who are supposed to uphold justice have risen to their positions by unjust means, won't those who will be making awards and offers be able to use that as precedent for doing the same?

To the lawyers, add the journalists, to the journalists add the bloggers, to the bloggers add the rakyat and voters.

Your Worship, the prosecution rests.

nb: worship because we now need to pray, not honour because there isn't anymore.

Folks

The Govt is evading the issue. Period.

It is threatening,intimidating, callous, and totally irresponsible to the calls of the Malaysian citizens.

We have Ministers who don't see themselves accountable to the public or to Parliament. They account to no one EXCEPT to the political party UMNO.

This UMNO-led Govt has reached the ultimate form of arrogance.

Don't be suprised if this UMNO-led Govt spins this issue into a RACE issue.

The landslide victory given to the Barisan Nasional Coalition parties in the last election was the big mistake made by the voters.

The promise of transparency, accountability and responsiblity was never fulfilled nor intended to be fulfilled. It was as empty as the vacuous space.

It is a Govt that does NOT believe in the accountability to the public and to the citizens. The Ministers are only accountable to UMNO.

Jeff and others. You know I am far from a fan of the Lah-ist regime. However, like many Muslim/Nationalist Malays, I am a fan of Fairuz and see him as separate from the Lah-ist rot. This action by the Bar Council Opposition, et al will turn Fairuz into a victim and turn Pak Lah's team into heroes as:

1 - Fairuz HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN to be the person on the other side of the line. Nevertheless, the lot winding up for the march has jumped on the band-wagon to condemn him on the basis of circumstantial evidence potentially even manufactured by a lawyer with a dodgy rep.

2 - Fairuz is the currently barring a couple of royals, the prominent Malay Islamic and nationalist hero, for his firm stance to address the Lina Joy case (at least he and his panel settled it), for staying neutral (hence apearing pro-royal) in the Kings vs PM issue on judge appointments and recently for declaring a desire to move away from British common law as a basis of our jurisprudence, the most patrioticly significant act on our 50th year of Merdeka!

3 - The reason that he is being attacked is now being interpreted as being due to the things he's seen as a hero by some! i.e. the Muslims will see the Pro-Lina Joy activists as principal supporters of his removal, the nationalists will see the Bar Council as those who do not want us to move away from British common law. Even Anwar will be tainted as being annoyed that he is being upstaged by Raja Nazrin and co who he cannot compete with, hence allowing himself to be used for this stunt!

So, you are all now falling into a trap! Your protesting at the present time presents Pak Lah's regime with the opportunity to appear a hero to the Malays, by defending a current Malay / Muslim / Nationalist hero, a son of a former mufti from a current marginal state (Kedah), who's legacy will remain even with his removal with Alauddin being his likely successor!

What is worse is that people will ask - why is VK Lingham not being targeted? He was the one who 'confessed'! Are those who are denounce Malays partisan turning openly partisan themselves? And how does giving Pak Lah the opportunity to be a hero to the (presently silent)majority help the cause to give his administration a bloody nose come election time?

"Why do they want to lower their standard, unless they want to show they are hostile (to the government) and (that they) support the opposition?"

To me they've got much better and higher standards than Minister Nasri because they know what is the right thing to do.

Simple logics tells me either Nasri can't differentiate what is wrong or he was trying to protect the CJ. More likely the latter.

"I am his Minister"?

Well, sounds like Nasri wanted to take part of the responsibility. You know... much like "I'm his boss" kind of thing. If he wanted to protect an alleged criminal, that's up to Nasri but we can still can judge who is right and who is wrong. All thanks to he internet, we are no more in the dark.

The CJ keeping quiet about it while "his minister" sent a denial message kinda reveal some "relation" between the two, isn't it?

A M Ubaidah S

You totally missed the point and the whole context of the whole issue.

Fairuz is the Chief Justice.

He is the head of the 3rd estate of the democracy.

You bringing in the Malay, Muslim dimension, is an attempt to bring the communal politics into the debate.

It could have been a nobn Muslim judge, or a Chinese or Indian Chief Justice.

It does not matter.

The fact that he has been alleged to have dance with the lawyer and failed to deny personally what transpired in the video clipping spoke volumes.

Fairuz is head of an institution that determines life and death, incarceration or freedom of every Malaysian.

Unfortunately for him, he is now seen as a bureaucrat under the thumbs of the Govt, or the Executive and the defacto Minister for Law. How could he allow that to happen.

As far back as 2001, Raja Aziz Addruse, the legal profession and the civil society had already expressed reservation of Fairuz's promotion, which was seen as not above board.

I don't agree with your line of argument, that Fairuz is being victimed and Pak Lah's regime as the heroes.

This is not about heroes and victims.

It is about justice, democracy and transparent. It is about the very foundation of democracy for which Fairuz had let it slipped out of his hands, wittingly or unwittingly, deliberately or otherwise.

No sir, you are taking a parochial view of the debate.

Frank & Honest and all of same mind, please come down from your high horses. Far from being parochial, my views express the real-politik of Malaysia today.

Which civil society were you talking about that had reservations over Fairuz's elevation. Yours? Raja Aziz Addruse, who makes his name by bucking the traditional Malay and indeed Malaysian norms? The Bar Council? That does not constitute all of Malaysian civil soc.

I remember the joy of Muslim groups in Malaysia that a Mufti's son has risen to CJ, with the view being perhaps the conflict between syariah and common law can be reduced if not eliminated. With a view that our secular laws can be more 'moral' besides constitutional.

There is no visual, nor even verbal proof of the CJ being in the video, and all the evidence that you and others have claimed, including his constitutional right to non-comment are hearsay.

It is too easy to break this accusation against Fairuz in the Malay mind and twist it to Pak Lah's favour:

1 - CJ Fairuz kena fitnah seorang lawyer yang memang jahat.

2 - Mereka memperalatkan Anwar untuk menjatuhkan CJ Fairuz. Anwar tak mungkin sendiri mahu melakukannya sebab di bawah pengendalian Fairuz, mahkamah membebaskan Anwar. Takkan Anwar tak kenang budi kot?

3 - CJ Fairuz ingin diperjatuhkan sebab dia menolak rayuan Lina Joy yang murtad tu. Tengok la orang yang menyerang CJ Fairuz sekarang - semua penyokong Lina Joy, Bar Council, Harris Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang, ramai lagi.

4 - Kalau tak percaya, cuba tengok, kenapa lawyer yang jahat tu takde orang yang suruh kena tangkap?

5 - Nasib baik Pak Lah dan Nazri pertahankan CJ Fairuz!

This is real-politik. This is partisan politics as UMNO would play it. Those who are pushing this issue are foolish indeed for blindly driving this issue in UMNO's favour...

Makes me wonder why Anwar issued the video in the first place. Is he that naive? Or is he cunningly in cahoots with Pak Lah?

Where is Raja Azalan? or Raja Nazri?

Arent the rulers supposed to defend the constitutions? and having served at the highest level of the justice, he should know the best.

I'm sure his views would be very much appreciated by the rakyat.

A M Ubaidah S

This not about politics.

It is red herring that you are pushing in this debate.

Or called, muddying the debate with extraneous issues. Specious argument.

The walk is about
pressing for thorough investigation into this matter only.

All players involved are still presumed to be innocence.

Unfortunately, as usual, politics, race and religion must be added to divert the real issues.

One for the road...

Sep 26, 2007

Malaysia's judiciary on Candid Camera
By Anil Netto

ref: http://tinyurl.com/2jdvzb

PENANG, Malaysia - On May 27, 1988, then-prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, his party faced with a legal challenge from rivals that threatened his leadership, summoned Malaysia's top judge, Salleh Abas, and gave him an ultimatum: resign or face a judicial tribunal. That secret private meeting led to suspension of Salleh and five other top judges (three of whom were later reinstated). It precipitated a crisis from which the judiciary has never recovered.

Today, the once-powerful Mahathir, 82, is under sedation in intensive care after surgery to treat a infection following a heart-bypass operation on September 4.

And today, the credibility of the judiciary itself is also on life support after explosive revelations in a widely circulated (including on YouTube) eight-minute video clip featuring what appears to be a well-connected senior lawyer, V K Lingam, purportedly discussing promotions and factionalism among senior judges over the phone with Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, the No 3 judge in the country at the time the clip was recorded on a mobile phone in 2002.

Lingam is also seen apparently talking to Fairuz about the latter's own rise within the judiciary. Ahmad Fairuz is today the country's chief justice, due to retire next month. The lawyer is also heard saying that he had discussed the judiciary with tycoon Vincent Tan and another prominent ruling party politician - both regarded as intermediaries to then-prime minister Mahathir. The conversation suggests that certain top judges are closely connected with the country's top leaders via political intermediaries and business cronies.

The minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Nazri Abdul Aziz, has said that the judge implicated in the video clip had called him to deny that he was the one talking to the lawyer.

Some see these revelations as God-sent. One academic told Asia Times Online, "This is a sterling opportunity to draw out the oligarchic control of this country - a chance to pull away from the ethnic ding-dong that's going on. Here is the oligarchy of wealth and privilege: an Indian lawyer, a Chinese tycoon, a Malay judge, etc. And claiming to do this in the interests of the country, of the PM" (Mahathir).

The affair gives a whole new meaning to the word muhibbah (Malay for "interracial goodwill") - while the elites divide and rule the rest of the country, secure in their own positions of wealth and power. It was only recently that Ahmad Fairuz stirred controversy when he suggested that reference to the English common law in Malaysia's legal system be abolished. The move sparked an outcry among non-Muslim groups who felt that it would pave the way for the adoption of sharia (Islamic law) precepts.

Civil-society groups have already called for the suspension of the chief justice. The Bar Council is organizing a march of lawyers from the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, the administrative capital, to the Prime Minister's Office on Wednesday. They will submit a memorandum to Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and the cabinet calling for a royal commission of inquiry to investigate the allegations in the video clip.

The government announced on Tuesday it is setting up an independent panel to investigate the video clip. The Bar Council welcomed this as a first step, but is still asking for a royal commission of inquiry which should also look into the state of the judiciary and the need for a Judicial Appointments Commission.

The video has demonstrated that Malaysians cannot leave the appointment and promotion of judges in the hands of the few, said lawyer Dipendra Harshad Rai in a published comment. He joined others in calling for the establishment of an independent commission for the appointment and promotion of judges.

Prior to 1988, he said, the top judge would forward a name, after police vetting, to the prime minister. This process also included the top judge consulting the bar chairman and other senior bar members. Although this practice was done informally, it did provide some assurance that only people of good character, competence and suitability were recommended, observed Dipendra.

The events of 1988 saw the end of this process. "Appointments and promotions of judges were left basically to the chief justice and the prime minister. Never have the fate of so many been decided by so few," said Dipendra. "No doubt, only those with the right political patronage and right beliefs were considered as suitable."

The video clip will affect every aspect of civil society, he added. "A layman who loses his case will feel that it was because the system is corrupt no matter how right the decision may have been," he said. "An investor would think twice before investing simply because the corrupt lawyers and corrupt judges will get him no relief."

The video clip was revealed to the media by former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim, who is now trying to stitch together an alliance among Malaysia's disparate opposition parties. Anwar himself was a victim of the judiciary, having been incarcerated after trials widely regarded as politically motivated.

Not surprisingly, faced with such compelling disclosures, the government has cast doubts on the authenticity of the video clip. But many Malaysians do not appear to be in the least surprised at the revelations and the clip has been posted all over Malaysian websites and blogs.

In 1999, opposition leader Lim Kit Siang tabled a substantive motion in Parliament expressing concern over serious allegations of judicial impropriety that had emerged in a defamation suit against the Asian Wall Street Journal.

In his motion, Lim pointed out that Lingam was alleged (by the Journal correspondent in an amended defense) to have written part of a 1994 judgment in a defamation case brought by Vincent Tan against the journalist. The judgment was alleged to have been typed by Lingam's secretaries, corrected by the lawyer and the final draft dispatched to the judge on a floppy disk. Lingam was also said to have placed the then former chief justice, Eusoff Chin, in his debt by getting their families to vacation together in New Zealand. Both the lawyer and the judge had posed for pictures with their arms around each other and with each other's families. The photographs later found their way on to the Internet and were widely circulated, sparking an earlier outcry.

Unlike the strong reaction in Pakistan when the country's top judge was dismissed and later reinstated, there is unlikely to be a similar reaction in Malaysia to the latest revelations - notwithstanding the lawyers' march on Wednesday and an emergency general meeting on October 6. The concern and outrage may be there, but for the most part, many Malaysians are no longer surprised at how low the judiciary has sunk, their expectations severely diminished since 1988.

While the call for a royal commission was appropriate, there was no guarantee it would achieve anything. "You can have all the 'independent' commissions in the world, but as long as you have some influential people prepared to use their leverage in such unprincipled ways, then no independent commission is going to be independent," said the academic mentioned earlier. He predicted there would be a concerted attempt to damp down the crisis.

Much would depend on how far Malaysia's Conference of Rulers (the country's nine sultans) would want to stick out their necks to defend the judiciary from executive interference.

Coming on the heels of a lackluster economy, both locally and globally, and allegations of widespread corruption, the crisis in the judiciary is the last thing Abdullah needs. His administration has been battered with accusations of lethargy, inertia and lack of vision. Given the current domestic climate and the credibility crisis, a significant economic downturn could have uncertain consequences and the country could pay a price.

The next general election is not due until early 2009 - though many have been expecting polls within the next six months - so Abdullah has plenty of time to let this crisis run its course and subside. Nonetheless, his reluctance to take decisive action has tarnished his own credibility. His administration has still not yet implemented a key recommendation from a royal commission to investigate the police - the call for an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission - though officials claim progress is being made.

The fractured opposition parties stand to gain from this crisis of credibility facing the judiciary. But they are unlikely to win the next general election given the ruling coalition's iron grip on the mainstream media and its control of development purse-strings.

That would leave the judiciary still in tatters. So, as much as Abdullah may be loath to back a royal commission of inquiry, he faces little choice if he wants to restore the credibility of the judiciary - and his administration. The alternative is sinking deeper into a morass of corruption, decay and disillusionment./