MAY DAY
FOR JUSTICE
This website is dedicated to the cause of the former Chief Justice and Lord President of the Supreme Court of Malaysia, Tun Salleh Abas - a true 'hakim rakyat'
“...my pleas, as we all know, fell on deaf ears....in the end, justice is not done because you have a better pleader or a better judge. Justice is not even done because you have better laws. These things are undoubtedly important.”
“But far more important than any of these is that society as a whole believes passionately that every human being deserves to be treated justly..."
".. that when one human being is manifestly denied justice, then we are in real danger of being denied it.”
“And justice cannot be done hastily. And justice cannot be done in the dark.”
“It has to be done with due deliberation, in full view of the people in whose name it is done. For it is done for them.”
Tun Salleh Abas (from the book with K Das "May Day For Justice")
May Day For Justice
The Removal of Tun Salleh Abas: A Summary
Forward by Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj
Is the Malaysian Judiciary Independent?
Chapter II: Independence
Chapter III: Hang The Judges!
Chapter IV: Information Vacuum
Chapter V: Peace Offerings
Chapter VI: Legal - Political Chaos
Chapter VII: If My Patience Should Cease To Be
Chapter VIII: Not Straight In The Eye
Chapter IX: Among the Hobgoblins
Chapter X: Executive Juggernaut
Chapter XI: A Nightmare Within A Nightmare
Chapter XII: Court Without Peer
COMING SOON: Chapter XIII - Chapter XX
If you have additional comments and views, please e-mail hakim_rakyat@hotmail.com
The Federal Constitution
Part II: Fundamental Liberties
The Police Act 1967 (Act 344)
Section 27: Power To Regulate Meetings, Assemblies and Processions
The Anwar Report
An independent legal view of the criminal case against Anwar Ibrahim
Statements, Declarations and Affadavits related to the Anwar Trial
Statutory Declaration by Manjeet Singh Dhillon, November 9th, 1998
Letter from Manjeet Singh Dhillon to Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, 12 October 1998
Statutory Declaration by Dr. Munawar Ahmad Anees, November 7th, 1998
Statement on The Rule of Law Under Threat, September 15th, 1998, by Tun Mohd Suffian and others
Notes from the Anwar Trial
Nov 24th, 1998: Police arrests and 'turning over'
Dec 7th, 1998: Azizan says Anwar did not sodomise him
Dec 23rd, 1998: Ummi's taped conversation (excerpts)
Waiting for Justice
By Sabri Zain, Internet Writer
Food For Thought
By Marina Yusof, Advocate and Solicitor
Justice and The Law
From The Asian Renaissance by Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim
Related Bar Council Statements
Justice For Anwar
COMING SOON:
The Internal Security Act, 1960
What is we still ride on, we two
With life forever old yet new
Changed not in kind but in degree
The instant made eternity, -
And heaven just prove that I and she
Ride, ride together, for ever ride?
geovisit();
May Day For Justice
The Background Behind Tun Salleh's Book
The Removal of Tun Salleh Abas
Mahathir was continually upset with the Judiciary because the verdicts in a number of cases went against the Government. According to then Deputy PM, Datuk Musa Hitam, one of his favourite slogans was "Hang the Lawyers! Hang the Judges!" From 1987, he intensified his verbal attacks against the Judiciary in the news media, making damaging statements which clearly demonstrated that he did not understand the role of the Judiciary as being independent from the Executive and Legislative arms of Government. That the Judiciary exists as a check-and-balance against the excesses of the Executive appeared to have been a concept he never fully grasped. Instead, he accused judges of the sort of political interference that would result in confusion and loss of public confidence in the Government. Hence, to curtail the powers of the Judiciary and subsume it beneath the Executive became one of his cherished dreams.
In April 1987, after an UMNO leadership contest in which Mahathir very nearly lost to Finance Minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, there were allegations that several delegates who had voted were drawn from branches not properly registered under the Societies Act 1966. An appeal was filed by eleven UMNO delegates to have the elections declared null and void. This was a very serious matter for Mahathir because if the appeal succeeded, fresh elections would have to be held and he might lose. The matter finally came before Justice Harun Hashim of KL High Court who ruled that under the existing law, he had no choice but to declare not just the elections invalid, but the whole of UMNO an unlawful society as well. The country and, more particularly, UMNO, went into a state of shock.
In most modern democracies, a political catastrophe of this magnitude would have result in the immediate resignation of the party's President and Prime Minister. But Mahathir did not resign. He informed the country that the Government would continue running the country. Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang and Tunku Abdul Rahman called for a vote in Parliament to establish Mahathir's legitimacy but those calls were ignored. Mahathir then set in motion the machinery to form a new surrogate party called UMNO Baru. His opponents, however, wanted the old party revived. The eleven UMNO delegates then launched an appeal in the Supreme Court to have the 1987 elections alone declared illegal and the party not an unlawful society.
Mahathir fully understood the danger to him of this pending appeal. He had to act quickly. In October 1987, he launched the notorious Operation Lalang in which at least 106 people were arrested and detained without trial under the ISA, including three very articulate critics, the Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang, political scientist Dr. Chandra Muzaffar and leading lawyer Karpal Singh. The official reason for the arrests was that a highly dangerous security situation had arisen but this has been strongly disputed as nothing more than a shameless fabrication. The broad sweep included even environmentalists and Consumer Association spokesmen. Four of the most outspoken newspapers -The Star, The Sunday Star, Watan and Sin Chew Jit Poh - had their publishing licences suspended. When, after five months, the papers were free to publish again, they were no longer the same.
Mahathir's next move was to push through Parliament far-reaching amendments to the Constitution so that the Executive gained in power enormously at the expense of the Judiciary. There was general indignation at this rude behaviour which shocked a good many people. The indecent haste and the fact that the amendments were made at a time when the Government's main critics were in detention, including the Opposition Leader and six vocal MPs and outspoken newspapers demoralized added further to the appalling injustice of the situation. Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's beloved first Prime Minister, put it succinctly: "It was legal, but was it just?" Others noted angrily that the Constitution had been raped once again. In a speech, the outgoing President of the Bar Council, Param Cumaraswamy, said:
"The Prime Ministe's vile and contemptuous allegations, and the accusations levelled at the Judiciary and our judges left many shocked beyond belief. His speech which was full of venom, hate and spite with no substance whatsoever, illustrated his complete and total ignorance of the role of the Judiciary and the judicial process itself. He has indeed defiled and defaced the Constitution. It is surprising that those 142 MPs who voted in favour, after taking the oath that they would preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, had no compunction about destroying one of its basic structures."
One visiting parliamentarian was astonished at the lack of public debate. In his own country, he said, such amendments would have taken years.
Next, after having curbed the independence of the Judiciary, Mahathir set about destroying its integrity. This was the removal of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President in 1988, a move which Tunku Abdul Rahman described as "the most shocking story in modern legal and judicial history,"
Tun Salleh Abas was a man of humble origins - his father was a sailor and small village trader - who rose to become Lord President, the highest judge in the land and head of the Judiciary while remaining a deeply religious man.
By March 1988, Mahathir's scandalous and violent public attacks on the Judiciary had so provoked the judges that Tun Salleh was obliged to call a conference. Twenty judges met in the Supreme Court one week after the debilitating and shameful Constitutional amendments were made. By unanimous agreement, a letter was drafted to the King (also the Sultan of Johore) and copied to all Sultans, expressing disquiet over various comments made by the Prime Minister. The letter was delivered on 25 March and Tun Salleh left soon after for medical treatment in the United States followed by a pilgrimage to Mecca. He had a most important duty to perform upon his return: he fixed the hearing of the crucial UMNO Eleven appeal for June and, because of its overwhelming significance, decided that a full coram of nine Supreme Court judges should hear this. Three days later, Tun Salleh was suspended from his official capacity by the King on recommendation of the Prime Minister. In the same hour that he received the suspension letter, the Acting Lord President, Tan Sri Abdul Hamid took the UMNO Eleven case out of the calendar so that the link between the two was difficult to deny.
Tun Salleh's suspension came after he refused to bow to Mahathir's pressure to either resign or retire, even though financial inducements were offered, including mention of a lucrative job in the International Development Bank in Jeddah. The initial reason given for the suspension was that the King had taken great displeasure over the letter Tun Salleh had written on behalf of all judges. According to official records prepared by the Attorney General, the King had requested Tun Salleh's removal in an audience with the Prime Minister on the "Wednesday morning of 1 May 1988" after the weekly Cabinet Meeting.
There are serious doubts as to whether this audience actually took place. The first of May 1988 fell on a Sunday, not Wednesday as the Attorney General recorded. Even if the day of week were corrected, there can be no Cabinet meeting on a Sunday. That the King expressed great displeasure only on 1 May, when he had in fact received the letter on 25 March cast further doubt over this assertion. It is difficult to believe that the King wanted Tun Salleh removed purely because he had protested about the public insults directed against the entire Judiciary by the head of the Executive. In any event, royal displeasure would not be a constitutionally valid ground for dismissal. Indeed, Mahathir advised the King as much in a letter written four days after this probably fictitious audience; however, the Prime Minister went further in the same letter to say that he would investigate Tun Salleh for any evidence of misbehaviour. In any event, the King did not clear up the mystery and, in an audience with Tun Salleh, actually asked the latter to step down without giving reasons although the Conference of Rulers had already asked for his reinstatement. Amazingly, Tun Salleh was suspended and a Tribunal set up to determine his fate before any formal charges were laid.
The Constitution does not provide for the removal of a Lord President. While the Tribunal need not be an inappropriate means, its composition was to say the least, disgraceful. It was composed of six acting and retired judges, although the Constitution required an odd number to prevent deadlock. Of these -four from Malaysia, one from Sri Lanka and one from Singapore -only the Sri Lankan enjoyed a rank comparable to Tun Salleh's. This was contrary to the very reasonable dictum that one should be tried by one's peers rather than one's juniors. The fact that two retired Lord Presidents of Malaysia were available but not invited was glaring. There were grave conflicts of interest with three of the Malaysian judges that should have disqualified them from sitting: Tan Sri Abdul Hamid who was next in line to succeed as Lord President and who had also participated in the conference of 20 judges which resulted in the letter to the King; Tan Sri Zahir who, being also the Speaker of the Lower House, was beholden to Mahathir, the principal complainant in the matter at hand; and Tan Sri Abdul Aziz who, although a former judge, was then a practising lawyer and, more incredibly, had two suits pending against him at that time. But Tun Salleh's objections were ignored and when the Bar Council issued a statement calling for the Tribunal to be re-constituted, both the New Straits Times and The Star refused to publish it. Further, it was decided that the Tribunal would sit in closed sessions although Tun Salleh had requested a public hearing.
The charges, when finally published, were manifestly absurd. Running over 12 sheets of paper, it was clear that quantity had been substituted where quality was lacking, and some of them actually related to Tun Salleh's behaviour after suspension. Many of them related to his speeches and press interviews, whereby sinister meanings were imputed to various innocuous comments that he had made. To cite an instance, in a speech at the University of Malaya, he had said: "The role of the courts is very important to bring about public order. If there is no public order there will be chaos in this country and if there is chaos, no one can feel safe" On this basis, Tun Salleh was charged with making statements criticizing the Government which displayed prejudice and bias against the latter. Another statement of his, "In a democratic system, the courts play a prominent role as agent of stability but they can perform this function only if judges are trusted," resulted in the charge that he had ridiculed the Government by imputing that it did not trust the judges. These charges were doubly ludicrous in the light of Mahathir's many poisonous attacks against the Judiciary.
It is not surprising that Tun Salleh, after reading this catalogue of fantasy crimes, refused to appear before what was so evidently a kangaroo court. The Tribunal, after refusing representations made by Raja Aziz, Tun Salleh's leading counsel, that it had no constitutional validity to sit, chose instead to proceed so hastily that it wound up deliberations, including the examination of witnesses with just four hours work. As it prepared to issue its Report, Tun Salleh's lawyers sought an urgent stay of proceedings in the High Court. This would normally be granted immediately at the least possibility that an injustice may be about to be done but, here, events turned into utter farce.
Instead of immediately reaching a decision as expected, the presiding judge, Datuk Ajaib Singh, after the court had been in languorous session the whole day that Friday, adjourned hearings for 9.30 am the next day. On Saturday however, the judge emerged in court only at 11.50 am and, even then, postponed hearings again for the Monday! In desperation, Tun Salleh's lawyers, knowing that the Tribunal could easily release its Report before then, sought the assistance of Supreme Court judge, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman, in his Chambers. The latter agreed to hear them in open court in half an hour's time and called a coram of all remaining Supreme Court, one of whom, Tan Sri Hashim Yeop, refused to sit. The soap opera reached an apogee of ridiculousness when Tan Sri Abdul Hamid, head of the Tribunal and Acting Lord President, gave orders for the doors of Supreme Court to be locked and for the seal of the Supreme Court to be secreted away!
Undeterred, the five Supreme Court judges ordered the policeman on duty to open the door forthwith. After less than half an hour, the Court ordered the Tribunal not to submit any recommendation, report or advice to the King. Tun Salleh's lawyers were typing the Order to serve personally to the Tribunal at Parliament House when news arrived that the gates of Parliament House had been locked! At this point, Justice Wan Suleiman rose to the occasion and, calling the office of the Inspector General of Police, told a senior officer that any impediment to serving the Order would constitute contempt of court. The gates of Parliament swung open and, at 4 pm, Raja Aziz and his team served the Order to the Tribunal members who were found to be still hard at work on a word-processor that Saturday afternoon. All six members accepted service without complaint.
It would appear that justice had at last prevailed but, four days later, all five Supreme Court judges were suspended. Almost every rule that was broken to suspend Tun Salleh was broken again to suspend them. The prohibition order they had made were revoked within days. A second Tribunal eventually reinstated three of the judge: Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Eusoff Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Hamzah but Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Edward Seah were removed from office.
The UMNO Eleven case was quickly dismissed. The removal of Tun Salleh also saw the resignation of Deputy PM Datuk Musa Hitam who, according to popular wisdom, could no longer stomach Mahathir's ways.
Back to HAKIM RAKYAT
Screenshots
Thinking Allowed. Thinking Aloud.
« The veteran speaks Main EHM »
Judiciary: 'The Hidden Story'
Justice George Seah© writes a must-read 5-part piece in the Malaysian Bar website, titled Crisis in the Judiciary - The Hidden Story, in which he says "history will exonerate me for taking a stand".
To give you some early spices, Seah's story starts with the episode where Umno was declared an illegal entity by the High Court in 1987. Justice Harun Hashim was the presiding judge.
An appeal to the Supreme Court of Malaysia was lodged by the Plaintiffs, so-called UMNO 11, who represented the Tengku Razaleigh faction. Salleh Abas, the incumbent Lord President, was suspended before the UMNO 11’s appeal could be heard and disposed of.
The records show that Salleh has order for a 9-judge panel to hear the UMNO 11's appeal, scheduled to start on June 13, 1988. Salleh gave the instructions on May 24, 1988. On May 27, 1988, Salleb Abas reported that he had been suspended from exercising his functions of High Office with restrospective effect from May 26, 1988.
The Chief Justice of the High Court of Malaya, Abdul Hamid Omar, now a Tun, was appointed Lord President and, on assuming office, the acting Lord President vacated the June 13, 1988 hearing date set by his deposed predecessor.
And Seah writes:
Some 15 years later, after the recent death of Dato Harun (Hashim) on 30 September 2003, the following orbituary appeared in the New Sunday Times, dated 5 October 2003 on page 10:
After Harun declared UMNO illegal, he only sought the Diarist’s opinion on what was next. The Diarist speculated and also told Tun Salleh Abas what could happen in the event they persisted in their plan to have a full court hearing of the UMNO case. Tun Daim Zainuddin had intimated to the Diarist the Government’s plan. They were simultaneously alarmed, sceptical and rather naive. The rest is history .... The Diarist that Seah mentions is Abdullah Ahmad aka Dollah Kok Lanas, who was then the Group EIC of the NSTP.
Seah, then, was sitting at the Supreme Court bench, alongside Salleh Abas.
As history has it again, Seah was suspended from his judiciary duty alongside four other Supreme Court judges. On this, Seah says:
It should be pointed out that Article 125 regulates the suspension and removal of a Judge of the Supreme Court. The Article does not provide for suspension and removal of more than one Judge of the Supreme Court. This is understandable because the Prime Minister has not been vested with power under the Federal Constitution to suspend the Supreme Court, which is the third pillar of a parliamentary democracy. Similarly, the King can remove the Prime Minister on constitutional grounds but, with great respect, has no power under the Federal Constitution to suspend Parliament. A fortiori, the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong has no vested power even under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution to suspend Parliament.
In my opinion, the subsequent suspension of the five Judges of the Supreme Court following the suspension of the incumbent Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas, was tantamount to the suspension of the Supreme Court. Nobody seems to have questioned the legality of the suspension of the five Judges of the Supreme Court at the material time and this constitutional point was not determined by the Tribunal set up to investigate the charges against the five Judges of the Supreme Court.
The fracas later degraded into a situation, borrowing words from Seah, of 'colonels judging the generals' and the verdict cast in stone. "It was an episode which plunged the judiciary into depths of despair."
Thanks reader Justin Beh for the heads-up.
'Opposition leader should head Judicial Commission'
At a time when the idea of a Judicial Commission is being tossed around by the present administration, Seah says the Opposition leader should head this commission. Quote"
I think I should give my personal views on the composition of members of the proposed Judicial Commission.
In the first place, the Prime Minister must not be involved, directly or indirectly, in these appointments. It follows that I am not in favour of the Prime Minister being appointed Chairman of the Judicial Commission. A fortiori, I am also against the Prime Minister nominating a person to be Chairman of the Judicial Commission. In my view, the Chairman of the Judicial Commission which is meant to be an independent and impartial body, should be the leader of the Opposition in Parliament, with the Chairman of the Bar Council of Malaysia, as his deputy.
As regards the other members of the Judicial Commission, the details can be worked out after hearing the views of the people of Malaysia, if the proposal is acceptable in principle.
If the Federal Constitution is to be amended to cater for this change, perhaps opportunities should be given to the people to put forward suggestions to amend the Constitution to prevent the Prime Minister from holding more than one portfolio in the Cabinet at any time. This would be in line with the principles of parliamentary democracy.
To commit history or to omit history? Your call. It's a history lesson for all of us.
Posted by Jeff Ooi on June 5, 2006 07:57 AM Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.jeffooi.com/mt32/mt-tb.cgi/461
Comments
Chairman of the Judicial Commission which is meant to be an independent and impartial body, should be the leader of the Opposition in Parliament
Amen.
And if that's really too much for this 'democratic' country of Malaysia, it should be at least to the fact that Prime Minister should only be allowed to put forward his nomination while the parliament votes for the appointment decision.
Posted by: alvin woon June 5, 2006 10:13 AM
What role did the ruling coalition have to play in this fiasco? Who was the leader of that coalition then?
Posted by: Leithaisor June 5, 2006 10:45 AM
The colonel-in-chief got a Tun to avoid future prosecution and review and so did the political survivor Tun Dr Mahathir just as he retired.
Posted by: dtsv June 5, 2006 11:01 AM
I apology for being 2 days late for commenting on the "TUN" topic.100% agree that Musa is really deserving this honour, but we are now left to wait for another vacancy before Samy Vellu can beg for one. I say it again, with all his big time screw ups, he really need a "TUN" ship to cover his ass, once he steps down from politics.This unfortunately means, he will hang on to screw us up further.
Posted by: ET June 5, 2006 11:04 AM
Until the Medicine Men(MM) come into play, most Bolehland Prime Minister are following the 1st world rule not to interfere with the economy and juridiction.
Posted by: moo_t June 5, 2006 11:08 AM
so...? soon we will have Tun LKY and Tun Samy...if they leave their parties?
So easy to a be a Tun? We have too many datos now..are we going the same way with Tuns?
My guess ...yes
Posted by: art chan June 5, 2006 11:34 AM
It will be many more years to dismantle Mahathir's legacy. He curbed the power of sultans, the judiciary, Umno elections and just about everything else.Next on the list is for reform is the education system. More powers should be given to school administrators and PTA's to decide on what form of education they should provide to students e.g they can choose whether to follow the malaysian syllabus/singapore /malaysian chinese schools /British/american etc with emphasis on BM as one of the subjects. Also, children should begin schooling at the age of 5 and not 7 as is practised now.
Posted by: sydput June 5, 2006 12:03 PM
In this context, please read "May Day for Justice" by that famous journalist for the full pathetic way the judges were dismissed.Some of those involved in that disgraceful episode are dead and gone but some are still around.It will remain as a permanent blot in our legal history.The shame will follow those involved in the plot to dismiss those judges for administering justice as it should, without fear and fafour to their graves .History will never forget and forgive them . Will God?ksn
Posted by: ksn June 5, 2006 12:06 PM
Perhaps Amir Muhammad , the director of documentary 'Lelaki Komunis Terakhir', should make a documentary movie on "The Last Few Good Men" and there is no reason for the govt to ban this movie as Mahathir is no longer the PM.
In fact, Pak Lah should give some govt funding and access to the govt resources to make this documentary movie.
Posted by: ktak June 5, 2006 12:25 PM
That's why we need a stronger opposition coaltion party.
Posted by: Overthefence June 5, 2006 12:55 PM
I concur absolutely with The Honourable Justice George Seah. As one can see TDM has many parallels with President George Bush. Both stole the elections to become head of state. Both are dishonest and manipulative except that TDM is worse than Bush. He manipulated to remove the LP and five Supreme Court judges which Bush did not do. SO TDM's call for people against war to be leaders is hypocrisy and incomplete. Leaders must also be anticorrupt, honest and respect meritocracy and independence of the judiciary and the press. Dont be a pot calling kettle black.
Posted by: bystander June 5, 2006 01:32 PM
The starting point where George begins omits the real beginning of the story when UMNO was declared illegal in 1987. He 'forgot' to mention that it was a court action by the UMNO 11 that led to the high court decision making UMNO illegal in the first place! The reason why the UMNO 11 then lodged an appeal is because KuLi did not want to be remembered as the person who's supporters' actions led to UMNO being declared illegal in 1987! In fact, Ku Li continues to be haunted by the fact as he and his team were poorly advised by their lawyers on their actions, including the CURRENT UMNO SEC-GEN among others! This is why Ku Li chose eventually to disband S46 to return to UMNO.
More importantly though, the idea of having the Opposition Leader as head of the Judicial Commission is if anything, a little naive. It may be acceptable to some here whilst LKS is still leader of the opposition, but demographically speaking, the future Opposition leader would be the PAS leader after the last election. So, would people be as happy with Hj. Hadi Awang, or his clone, champions of Hudud Law, being head of the Judicial Commission?
In addition, having then the head of the Bar Council be deputy head of such a Commission is worse than the past scenario of having colonels judging the generals, it would be akin to having Leutenants judging everyone from Captains (Magistrates) through to Generals (Supreme Court Judges)!!
The Bar Council does not have any legitimate right, constitutionally or democratically, to be involved in the Judicial Commission and with the conflict of interest involved, should hardly be considered as parties involved in leading it!
So, is this really the writings of a former Supreme Court judge, or is someone putting words into this learned man's mouth? Someone from the Bar Council perhaps?
Posted by: A M Ubaidah S June 5, 2006 01:34 PM
Sorry, I meant to write "demographically speaking, the future Opposition leader would be the PAS leader after the next election"
Posted by: A M Ubaidah S June 5, 2006 01:36 PM
Malaysians must never forget the Judicial crisis of 1988 in which Datuk George Edward Seah Kim Seng, Tun Salleh Abas ( Monday 8/8/88 ), our own Lord Denning - the late Tan Sri Datuk Seri Dr. Eusoffe Abdoolcader ( Jan 11 1996 ) and other eminent Malaysian judges were made to pay a price for being courageous.
Posted by: Kelembai June 5, 2006 01:51 PM
Jeff, "May Day For Justice" by Tun Salleh Abas himself explains this judicial crisis in a very detailed manner. Reading the book made me lose respect for so many of our politicians and gain respect for the unsung heroes of the day, many of whom the younger generation have never heard about.
Posted by: badawi_rocks June 5, 2006 02:14 PM
The sacking of the Lord President and other fellow judges in 1998 marked the blackest day in the Judiciary's history, and it has never fully recovered from that fall. Yesterday's New Sunday Times ran an instructive interview aith a retired Justice Shaikh Daud who gave some good views sbout formation the Judicial Commission. NegaraKU salutes George Seah for recording history in the truest manner possible against some past and present politicians' manipulating its writing to continue the myth that is "Malaysia" only serving the interests of powerful politicians and their cronies. We have NOT arrested the decline since 1988. May the wise ones trace the true culprits.
Posted by: desiderata June 5, 2006 03:04 PM
Oops, a typo...agin! Sacking in 1988...NOT 1998...my bad.
Posted by: desiderata June 5, 2006 03:05 PM
This revelation by Datuk George Seah (Poor man, no wonder he has remained only a Datuk!) is simply EARTH SHATTERING! I only question the good Datuk why has it taken so long for him to reveal the real situation as it was then? Maybe there was still genuine fear when the King was still around? Nevertheless, still better late than never or else we will never know the truth!
It was just like any palace plot to remove those good and honest officials who stood in the way of the wicked King. The King arms the next guy down the line with a sword and his royal backing plus a few selected underlings and hey presto, trumped up charges are hurled at the officials and subsequently executed! Henry VIII of England did it, Emperors in China did it and why shouldn't a PM of Malaysia do it?
Back to the present. What are we going to do about it? What can we do to undo such an injustice committed against 6 judges of the Supreme Court when the Supreme Court was illegally usurped by the Executive? Are these six to die from the pages of history with such false and ignominous "shame"?
I say that a Royal Commission be set up to investigate and to make a report on this shameful episode of Malaysian history when our democracy was so shamelessly undermined! Even if the culprits and perpetuators of this infamous incident go unpunished, history must be corrected and our future generations must know the truth and never again allow our democracy to be surreptiously stolen like a thief in the night!
Posted by: superjim June 5, 2006 04:01 PM
This revelation by Datuk George Seah (Poor man, no wonder he has remained only a Datuk!) is simply EARTH SHATTERING! I only question the good Datuk why has it taken so long for him to reveal the real situation as it was then? Maybe there was still genuine fear when the King was still around? Nevertheless, still better late than never or else we will never know the truth!
It was just like any palace plot to remove those good and honest officials who stood in the way of the wicked King. The King arms the next guy down the line with a sword and his royal backing plus a few selected underlings and hey presto, trumped up charges are hurled at the officials and subsequently executed! Henry VIII of England did it, Emperors in China did it and why shouldn't a PM of Malaysia do it?
Back to the present. What are we going to do about it? What can we do to undo such an injustice committed against 6 judges of the Supreme Court when the Supreme Court was illegally usurped by the Executive? Are these six to die from the pages of history with such false and ignominous "shame"?
I say that a Royal Commission be set up to investigate and to make a report on this shameful episode of Malaysian history when our democracy was so shamelessly undermined! Even if the culprits and perpetuators of this infamous incident go unpunished, history must be corrected and our future generations must know the truth and never again allow our democracy to be surreptiously stolen like a thief in the night!
Posted by: superjim June 5, 2006 04:02 PM
art chan - I believe the number of TUNships is limited to 27 at any one time.ET - are you suggesting that a Tunship confers immunity from prosecution?
Posted by: LLtwigs June 5, 2006 08:28 PM
at one time datoship was a very elusive title..only the honoured few and those with exemplary credential..select few..
but now we have so many datos..
who knows? one day Tunships awards may go the same way as datoship....
Posted by: art chan June 6, 2006 08:55 AM
superjim...
don't waste any time with a royal commission.
RC came out with IPCMC...nothing came out of it..
Think it will be any different with the RC on this issue.??
Justice George Seah came out with his story..and I believe what he wrote.
Posted by: art chan June 6, 2006 09:01 AM
I agree with art chan that someday in the not so distance future, (if the trend continue) particularly everyone would have a dato in front of their name and there would be alot of Tuns as well. (the TUNship might be limited to 27 now, but in Bolehland, everything can change with a blink of an eye)
Reasoning: Bolehman need to improve and having a title "should" represent "progress"...
Posted by: citizen al June 6, 2006 10:07 AM
The long and short of it all is that TDM screwed the Supreme Court judges and the Rakyat according to Justice George Seah and TS Ani Arope. Who else did TDM not screw except for the IPPs (YTL, Malakoff, Genting ets etc) who are his "hand in glove partners"?
Posted by: bystander June 6, 2006 11:16 AM
Folks
Hear is another news rarely made into UMNO controlled press.
Tun Salleh Abas joined PAS, got elected in the Trengganu State Assembly.
What does this show?
It is not the Govt that Tun Salleh Abas was flabbergasted, it is the damn UMNO politics that strangled and made into a perversion of Malaysian parliamentary democracy. UMNO under Dr M was the most dictatorial, suppressing the judiciary, other races, and opposition parties. It is almost like a One Party State, which is like what you get in China, Cuba and North Korea, with the principle of freedom of speech being made into a joke.
What Justice Seah is not saying, to be politically correct, is the disturbing castration of democracy by UMNO and UMNO able to get away because of its expert manipulation of the racial politics of fear with the non-Malays cowed into silence, in one form or another and the Malays being falsely being made fearful of others... right up today.
Why would the highest and most respect Lord President joined politics of the Malay Opposition Party. Because of the sickening politics of the Malay ruling party in Govt, with powers unchecked, right up to this day, and abusing the reins of authority with absolute arrogance.
While Malaysians take self-therapy avenues such as on this blog to whine and whinge, and feeling good about it. When next election comes, they all go out and vote UMNO, MCA and MIC, and then continue to whine and whinge till the next election, and history repeats since 1957.
Posted by: Frank&Honest June 6, 2006 11:27 AM
F&H, can't help it lah. There is no credible opposition till this very day. We have talked about this many times before and it will remain so for many more years to come.The only hope is to vote in more opposition MPs to have a proper check and balance next time.
Posted by: Jan June 6, 2006 11:49 AM
Somthing to share and chew over:
"What became of the Judiciary following Salleh?
It was downhill all the way…
It led the country’s leading judicious mind
The late Tun Suffian Hashim to lament in 2000:
“I wouldn’t like to be tried by today’s judges,
Especially if I am innocent.”*
*Quoted from a speech on March 10, 2000 that the former Lord President delivered at a Bar commemoration for the late Justice Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman.
Posted by: desiderata June 6, 2006 01:30 PM
F & H, I like your conclusion which I take as a challenge to all us to quit whining and whinging and do something about it. No viable opposition? Who are we? Do we uphold the same values? Do we want the same things? Maybe, since we all gravitate to the same site which is Jeff's, he represents whatever commonalities we might have. So, Jeff, how about registering the Jeffooi Party? You should start crafting a manifesto that we all can comment. Next election, we don't have to vote for Barisan. On the other hand, inspite of all this shit, maybe this is as good as it gets...
Posted by: puddingarnab June 6, 2006 03:51 PM
"F&H, can't help it lah. There is no credible opposition till this very day. We have talked about this many times before and it will remain so for many more years to come.The only hope is to vote in more opposition MPs to have a proper check and balance next time."
jan,david also have no credible against goliath, so do moses against pharoah....dont be coward
Posted by: rosman June 6, 2006 06:22 PM
Hi Jeff,
Just to clarify - actually the 5 part piece in the Malaysian Bar Council website is not a "recent expose" done by the Bar Council.
The articles were actually published in the Aliran monthly newsletters in 2004.
Part 1http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/monthly/2004a/4m.html
Part 2http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/monthly/2004a/5h.html
Part 3http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/monthly/2004a/6f.html
Part 4http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/monthly/2004b/7i.html
Part 5http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/monthly/2004b/8k.html
I am surprised that there was no acknowledgement of this republication of the Aliran by the Bar Council though - perhaps an oversight on their part.
Nevertheless, it's good to remind those who may be too young to remember, as well as those who may have forgotten, of these important events in our nation's history.
Otherwise we may never learn from our mistakes.
Posted by: boyaboy June 6, 2006 07:39 PM
"No viable oppositions".
!!!!!? Come on, are your waiting for a saint that born 2006 years ago to lead oppositions?
And how about the stupid "devil and the deep blue sea" talks.
Vote opposition, balance the power and you will see political people fight to gain people trust, rather than fighting to gain monetary benefits.
Posted by: moo_t June 6, 2006 08:09 PM
Folks
The infighting in Umno begins. Mahathir accuses of Pak Lah stabbing on his back.
Read below:
http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-06-07T154652Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-253210-1.xml
PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia (Reuters) - Former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad accused the current prime minister on Wednesday of breaking a pact between them, signalling worsening relations between two of the ruling party's most powerful men.
In his most personal attack on his hand-picked successor, Mahathir also said he perhaps had a habit of choosing the wrong people, noting that many of them had ended up turning on him.
"I have held many people up only for them to stab me in my back...," Mahathir told reporters when asked if choosing Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had been his biggest mistake.
Mahathir retired in late 2003, handed power to Abdullah and pledged not to meddle in government. But he has been angered by several decisions of his successor, especially the recent scrapping of a planned bridge to neighbouring Singapore.
The project had been conceived near the end of Mahathir's 22-year reign but was scrapped in April because of Singapore's objections. At the time, Mahathir said the government had sold out Malaysian sovereignty and lacked "guts".
On Wednesday, at a news conference called to discuss an upcoming peace forum he is hosting, Mahathir returned to the attack and said Abdullah had promised him he would continue with major projects begun by the former government.
Mahathir said that on handing over power, he in return had promised Abdullah he would stay out of politics.
"But the incoming government not only did not do what was promised, in fact the incoming government reversed many of the decisions made...," the 80-year-old said, adding he felt hurt by suggestions he had spent huge sums of money on mega-projects.
"I chose him ... I expect a reasonable degree of gratefulness but instead I am told that I have indulged in mega-projects and that I have finished all the money in the country," he said.
Mahathir said he would remain a watchful critic of the government but would not work to topple his successor.
"I am not capable of doing that," said Mahathir, who still commands strong support within the main ruling party, the United Malays National Organisation, which can make or break prime ministers. But, he added, "I am watching."
< Home
Wiki: Najib Tun Razak
Ad: Search & Share - New Free Service
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak (born July 23, 1953, in Kuala Lipis, Pahang) is a Malaysian politician, who has been the country's Deputy Prime Minister since January 7, 2004. Najib is a member of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), and is currently the Vice President of the party.
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib is the eldest son of Tun Abdul Razak, the second Prime Minister of Malaysia, and a nephew of Tun Hussein Onn, the third PM. He was first elected to the Dewan Rakyat, representing the parliamentary constituency of Pekan, at the age of 23 in an uncontested election after the death of his father. In his career, Najib has held a variety of ministerial portfolios (the first at the age of 32), culminating in the post of Minister of Defence before being chosen as the deputy PM by Abdullah Badawi. Najib holds the title of Orang Kaya Inderapura of Pahang. He was first married to Tengku Puteri Zainah Tengku Eskandar; presently he is married to Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor. He has three sons, Nizar (born 1978), Nazifuddin and Norashman, and two daughters, Puteri Norlisa and Nooryana Najwa.
Najib had his primary and secondary education at St. John's Institution, Kuala Lumpur. He also attended Malvern College, Worcestershire, England and subsequently attended the University of Nottingham.
Yang Amat Berhormat Dato' SriMohd Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak
9th Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia
Incumbent
Assumed office October 31 2004
Preceded by
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
Minister of Finance of Malaysia
Incumbent
Assumed office September 17 2008
Preceded by
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
Minister of Defence of Malaysia
In officeOctober 31 2004 - September 17 2008
Succeeded by
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
Born
23 July 1953 (age 55)Kuala Lipis, Pahang
Political party
Barisan Nasional, UMNO
Spouse
Tengku Puteri Zainah Tengku Eskandar (1976 - 1987)
Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor
Children
1. Mohd. Nizar 2. Puteri Norliza 3. Mohd. Nasifuddin 4. Nooriyana Najwa 5. Norashman Razak
Occupation
Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, Defence Minister of Malaysia, Member of Parliament
Religion
Islam
Malaysia
This article is part of the series:Politics and government ofMalaysia
Other countries · AtlasPolitics Portalview • talk • edit
1. Controversies
1. 1. 1987 Kampung Baru rally
In the midst of UMNO's internal crisis in 1987, a rally by UMNO Youth led by Najib was held in Kampung Baru. Anti-Chinese sentiments were expressed openly during the rally with placard carrying slogans like "May 13 has begun", and "Soak (the kris) in Chinese blood". This precipitated existing ethnic tensions leading to fears of a repeat of inter-ethnic violence and eventually resulted in a security operation known as Operasi Lalang, where administrative detentions were made on hundreds of individuals [1] .
UMNO was also declared illegal in early 1988, allowing the Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamad, to consolidate his power with the establishment of a new party that assumed the name of the previously banned UMNO. The newly formed party excluded those who had previously challenged Mahathir's authority within the party [2] .
1. 2. Claims Malaysia is an Islamic State
In keeping in line with UMNO's strategy of politicizing racial and religious issues [3] , Najib declared that Malaysia has "never been secular because being secular by Western definition means separation of the Islamic principles of in the way we govern the country.” [4]
1. 3. Mongolian Murder Case
He had a close aide, Abdul Razak Baginda, who was involved in a high-profile murder case of a Mongolian woman [5] , Altantuya Shaaribuu. In a statutory declaration in his sedition trial in June 2008, Raja Petra accused Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor (his wife) of being one of three individuals who were present at the crime scene when Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered on Oct 19, 2006 [6] . He wrote that Najib’s wife, Rosmah Mansor, and Acting Colonel Aziz Buyong and his wife, Norhayati, Rosmah’s aide-de-camp, were present at the scene of the murder and that Aziz Buyong was the individual who placed C4 plastic explosive on Altantuya’s body and blew it up. [7]
Dr Shaariibuu Setev, the father of murdered Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu, has asked the police to conduct a thorough investigation into an allegation by Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamaruddin. He said the police should look seriously into the allegation by Raja Petra as it might provide them with fresh evidence. [8] In retaliation, the two people named in Raja Petra Kamarudin’s statutory declaration on June 18, Lt-Col Aziz Buyong and his wife Lt-Col Norhayati Hassan, as having been present at the murder scene of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu are suing the Malaysia Today editor for defamation. Aziz is seeking an apology from Raja Petra to be published in certain websites and newspapers, the removal of the statutory declaration from his blog and damages of RM1 million. [9]
Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal, a private investigator hired by Abdul Razak, testified in a statutory declaration that Abdul Razak had told him that Najib had had a sexual relationship with Altantuya, introduced her to Abdul Razak, and made arrangements to protect Abdul Razak from the murder trial. All mention of Najib's involvement had been removed from Balasubramaniam's testimony under police interrogation and not brought up in the murder trial [10] . Soon after Balasubramaniam made a retraction of the statutory declaration that he made on July 1 and replaced it with one that erased all traces of allegations with references to Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Altantuya Shaariibuu's murder. There were accusations that this new statutory declaration could have been due to intimidation or inducement, and was done not of his own free will. His lawyer Americk Singh Sidhu said he was not able to get in touch with Bala despite repeated phone calls. [11] The Malaysian police said on Sunday 6 July that they have asked Interpol to help find the private investigator who has been reported missing since making explosive claims linking the deputy premier to a murder. Bala's nephew has filed a missing person's report, saying the investigator and his family had disappeared. [12] It was discovered on July 10 that Balasubramaniam's house in Taman Pelangi here has been broken into but police have yet to ascertain whether anything was stolen. Balasubramaniam is said to have taken refuge in a neighbouring country with his wife and children. [13]
On July 22, 2008 in light of the new declarations lawyer Karpal Singh filed a notice of motion to call Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and three others to testify in the trial for the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu. Karpal who holds a watching brief for Altantuya's family, also sought to recall private detective P. Balasubramaniam who was the first prosecution witness in the trial. Karpal also wanted all proceedings with regard to the trial to be postponed pending the disposal of his application. [14] On July 23, 2008 the High Court rejected a petition by lawyer Karpal Singh to obtain testimony from Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak, dealing a blow to the opposition's efforts to link Najib to the 2006 killing of translator Altantuya Shaariibuu. In rejecting the application, High Court judge Mohd Zaki said Karpal, who is holding a watching brief for victim Altantuya's family, has no locus standi or is in no position to make the application. He mentioned only the parties involved, namely the prosecution and the defence, have the right to do so. [15] [16]
1. 4. Alleged Hindu Practitioner
On 22 August, 2008 Datuk Seri Najib Razak publicly swore according to Islam at Masjid Jamek Guar Perahu that he never knew murdered Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu, nor had anything to do with her. The deputy prime minister said: "Even though this is not an official oath on the Quran: Wallahi, Wabillahi, Watallahi, I never knew nor had anything to do with the Mongolian woman Altantuya." [17] Raja Petra who has vowed to deny Najib a chance to be Prime Minister, put up the sworn statement on this Malaysia Today website by Thagarajoo Thangavelu who claimed to be a driver for businessman Datuk Kenneth Eswaran and formerly for politician Datuk K.S. Nallakaruppan in a posting titled "Najib: Muslim by birth, Hindu by practice". In the statutory declaration dated Aug 22 and made in Kuala Lumpur, Thagarajoo claimed Eswaran was a close friend of Najib and had brought a Hindu priest from Kerala named Mr. Ji to perform rituals regularly at the deputy prime minister's private residence in Jalan Duta and also at the official residence in Putrajaya. He also claimed that the priest had performed similar rituals before the Ijok by-election to ensure Barisan Nasional's victory and also to prevent prime minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi from marrying Datin Seri Jeanne Abdullah. [18] [19]
1. 5. Alleged Political Conspiracy against Anwar Ibrahim
On 30 June, 2008 Najib denied any personal involvement in the alleged political conspiracy against former deputy premier Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, including a police report alleging Anwar committed sodomy against his former aide. He said the picture of his aide Khairil Anas Yusof with the alleged sodomy victim Saiful Bukhari Azlan at his office had been taken three months ago when the latter, in his capacity as a student leader, came to his office to seek a scholarship. [20] However on 1 July 2008, Najib mentioned that he met Saiful at his residence a few days before the Saiful made the police report on Anwar. Najib also said that Saiful wanted to reveal that he had been sodomised by Anwar. [21] Raja Petra, a prominent Malaysian blogger activist contended that a friend had accompanied Saiful to a meeting with Najib before charges against Anwar were made public, implying that the new charges against Anwar had been trumped up. [22] It was alledged by Federal Territory Mosque imam Ramlang Porigi that Najib's special officer Assoc Prof Khairil Annas Jusoh asked him to witness the oath-taking at the mosque on August 15 by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan that Anwar sodomised him. Ramlang was the witness at the Federal Territory Mosque in Jalan Duta on August 15 when Mohd Saiful Bukhari took an oath to demonstrate he was telling the truth when he accused Anwar of having sodomised him. [23]
1. 6. Problems with National Service
The Malaysian National Service, a brainchild of Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak, has been plagued with poor management right from its inception. [24] As of May 2008, there have been 16 deaths in the Malaysian National Service. [25] Earlier in 2007, when queried by the press on these deaths, Najib was quoted as saying that "only" 14 children have died, in an attempt to minimize the bad press being received for these deaths. [26] When recently pressured by more calls to suspend the program due to the 16th death, Najib responded that it was not feasible to stop the program since "many parties are involved". [27]
1. 7. Issue of Succession
In many of the controversies about him, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi identified Deputy Prime Minister Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Razak on 6th April, 2008 as his probable successor in line with the ruling party's tradition of political succession. [28] Because of his implied involvement in the controversial Altantuya case, the court trial has gone through numerous irregularities and delays [29] . Even former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir predicted that Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will never allow his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Razak to take over as Prime Minister. He said that although Abdullah promises that Najib would succeed him by 2010, allegations would be hurled against the deputy prime minister before then to show up his inability to take over. [30]
Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) report was lodged by veteran Selangor Umno leader Datuk Mazlan Harun in August against Najib Razak and Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi for alleged abuse of power. Mazlan had said the report was based on a letter written by Petaling Jaya Selatan Umno division head Kapt (R) Datuk Zahar Hashim which accused the two of "political corruption of the highest order." In the letter addressed to the Umno secretary-general, Zahar said the two top leaders had been campaigning to defend their positions despite asking others not to do the same, adding their actions had violated guidelines issued by party headquarters. [31]
2. Notes and references
Cite error 5; Invalid
Preceded byAbdullah Ahmad Badawi Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia2003- Succeeded byincumbent
• • Deputy Prime Ministers of Malaysia
Abdul Razak · Ismail Abdul Rahman · Hussein Onn · Mahathir Mohamad · Musa Hitam · Ghafar Baba · Anwar Ibrahim · Abdullah Badawi · Najib Tun Razak
Category: 1953 births, Living people, Malaysian politicians, Deputy Prime Ministers of Malaysia, Alumni of the University of Nottingham, Malaysian Muslims, Malay Malaysians, People from Pahang
Languages: id ms pl zh
The article "Najib Tun Razak" is part of the Wikipedia encyclopedia. It is licensed under the terms of the GNU FDL.
"Najib Tun Razak" on the wikipedia website
Page history
Discussion
Edit this page modified: 2008-09-17 09:36:13
No comments:
Post a Comment