Screenshots

In the Lingam Tape, this monologue from VK Lingam's telephone conversation was heard:

No don’t worry, Datuk, I know how much you suffer for Tun Eusoff Chin. And Tun said Datuk Ahmad Fairuz 110% loyalty. We want to make sure our friends are there for the sake of the PM and the sake of the country.

Not for our own interest, not for our own interest. We want to make sure the country come first. Well, you suffered so well, so much you have done. For the election, Wee Choo Keong, everything. How much, no body would have done all these.

Yes, you know. Good lah. Don’t worry. I am constantly working on this.

FLASHBACK: Wee is a former DAP member who was the Member of Parliament for Bukit Bintang. In 1995, then High Court judge and current Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim made a controversial decision sitting as an Election Judge. He dismissed Wee as MP and declared the BN candidate as the new MP instead of calling for fresh election.

September 26, I prodded Wee in a blog entry, asking him how would he act now, after a lapse of 12 years in the doldrum. We cheered over beers when David Sasaki was in town.

Apparently, Wee is striking back.

This morning, he is going to lodge a formal complaint with the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) against the four parties for alleged infringement of his human rights, namely ( 1 ) Lawyer Kanagalingam;
( 2 ) CJ Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim; ( 3 ) De facto Law Minister Nazri Abdul Aziz; and ( 4 ) Malaysian Government.

However, Wee and we do not know if Suhakam is again assigning retired teacher N Siva Subramaniam to receive the complaint. So all the best.

Must Agong extend CJ's service?

Meanwhile, the Abdullah Administration was said to have invoked Article 125 of the Federal Constitution and recommended to the Agong a 2-month extension for Ahmad Fairuz to stay on as the Chief Justice after his 66th birthday on October 31.

Henceforth, started another Abdullah controversy as the law says all judges must retire the moment they hit 66.

October 16, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Aziz said the Agong had to act on the prime minister's advice in the extension of the term.

However, senior lawyer and Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh said the extension of the chief justice's tenure is the prerogative of the king,

He said a phrase in Article 125(1) of the Federal Constitution stated that a judge shall hold office until he attained the age of 66 and a further six months "as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may approve" should be read together with Article 40(2).

Karpal said it was the Agong alone who had the discretion on whether to extend Ahmad Fairuz's tenure after he turns 66 on November 1.

"The king may consult the prime minister, but it is purely consultation and nothing else," he said.

Karpal's views were concurred by the Bar Council.

October 17, the Council issued a press statement saying that Article 125 provides that the extension of a Judge of the Federal Court may be given “as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may approve”. Quote:

The argument appears to be that this nevertheless requires the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to act on the advice of the Prime Minister in accordance with the scheme under the Constitution in relation to the appointments and promotions of Judges under Article 122B.

If that be the case, it would also require consultation with the Conference of Rulers to provide the necessary checks and balances and to preserve the core value of the independence of the Judiciary from the Executive.

Whatever the interpretation, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is not precluded from proferring a view nor from asking for information under Article 40.

Based on that, the Bar Council declared it is against the idea of extending Ahmad Fairuz's service after his retirement age.

It said the interest of the institution of Judiciary is best served by refusing the extension of the CJ's service.

The Bar Council has also been running a poll on this question: "Should the term of the current Chief Justice which expires on Oct 31 be extended to a period of not more than 6 months?" Click here to view the poll results.

Aliran hit the nail harder by saying: Ahmad Fairuz must go -- and go now.

Three weeks, nothing happened

Meanwhile, the 3-member Independent Panel to Verify the Authenticity of The Video Clip has wasted taxpayers' time and money and failed to come up with anything concrete after three weeks of deliberation.

Panel chairman, former judge Haidar Mohamad Noor, said October 10 that his team was not ready for a meeting with the Bar Council on the same day, a request which was forwarded on October 8. Haidar asked before hand for the specific issues Bar Council wanted discussed.

October 12, the Bar Council forwarded a memorandum listing down the issues which the Council would like to bring to the attention of the Panel.

To date, the Council said it has yet to receive a reply from the Panel.

The above-mentioned letters and memorandum can be downloaded here.

UPDATES: The last we have heard is that the Lingam Tape will be sent to a Hong Kong expert group for authentication and analysis.

Apparently, the ACA had earlier approached the US Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyse the video clip after the panel was set up on Sept 26, but the US agency declined as it was not part of evidence involving a violent crime.