One of the worst things that could happen to someone, especially a very public figure, is to be made the subject of public speculation of some great misdeed, and yet not be afforded the forum to vindicate oneself.
This subject cropped up at the Press Club a couple of nights ago.
I mentioned, half-jokingly, that if any of us was faced with some police investigation into the gruesome murder of a young woman whose body was then chopped up, the last thing such a person would want was a ‘NFA’ ( no further action ) on the investigation file, particularly if the public was openly discussing the matter and appeared to be convinced of that person’s guilt.
Unless you were in fact implicated in this horrible crime, in which case you would be grateful for the ‘NFA’. In fact, you would probably pay big time to have the matter ‘NFA’ed.
If, however, you were clean as a whistle and were being maligned by certain individuals with a hidden agenda and these individuals appeared to be successfully spinning your guilt in public space, you would want to be prosecuted so that you would have the very public forum of the courts to clear your name.
I know I would.
Take the Norita Shamsuddin murder.
Although the evidence was pathetic, there was still a charge and a trial.
And an acquittal.
And a man got to clear his name through the public forum of a court trial.
Had the AG’s chambers decided to not bring charges owing to the inadequacy of the evidence, someone would not have been able to clear his name and might have been convicted by the court of public opinion.
Most unfair!
And even if the AG’s chambers gets the flak for a failed prosecution, that should not deter such a prosecution as the purpose must be seen as two-fold, especially in a case that has generated wide publicity.
First, it shuts out the speculation whether the case was ‘NFA’ed because the prosecution was ‘got to’. Whether the police investigation team was ‘got to’ is another matter.
Second, it allows a man to clear his name out in the open.
This is of paramount importance.
And I guess that’s what Dr M wants when he says, as reported in the NST online today, that ‘he would not settle for less than his day in court so that he could defend himself against allegations he was at the centre of a judicial appointments scandal in 2001′.
For another’s take on this, go HERE.
Dr M is also reported to have said :
“Because people will then think that I lobbied to get off. Put me in court and let me explain. I don’t believe I did anything wrong but if they feel that I am guilty, I will accept any punishment. I welcome any investigations against me. I only ask that they charge me in court and I hope that the judge will allow me to speak,”
Now I still think Dr M is guilty as hell, but, yes, he too, is entitled to the presumption of innocence until tried and convicted by a competent court, if indeed he is ever charged.
And if so charged, then, yes, the law says that to give him a fair trial in court, the less should be said of the matter in public.
This is where, perhaps, Gani did a great disservice to Najib.
Depriving Najib of the opportunity to clear his name through the courts and to stop tongues wagging publicly.
It’s not as if the great advantage and utility of the courts to clear one’s name might have escaped Gani’s notice. He, too, once faced the gravest of charges that could be thrown at a prosecutor and was denied the opportunity to vindicate himself through the courts.
Remember the Anwar corruption trial before Augustine Paul?
Well, in the course of that trial in November, 1998, Anwar’s lawyer, Zainur Zakaria, applied to remove both Gani ( who was then Senior DPP and in charge of prosecutions ) and DPP Azhar Mohamed ( now Justice Azhar Mohamed ) from the prosecution team on the allegation that both Gani and Azhar had attempted to elicit fabricated evidence from Nallakarupan against Anwar in exchange for a reduced charge against Nalla for illegal possession of live ammo.
That application was supported by the statutory declaration of Manjit Singh Dhillon, counsel for Nalla. Annexed to the statutory declaration as an exhibit was a letter by Manjit to then AG Mokhtar Abdullah detailing Manjit’s allegation about how Gani was alleged to have attempted to get Nalla to fabricate false evidence against Anwar.
No doubt Gani would have been incensed with this allegation and would have wanted to challenge this with a rebuttal affidavit and possibly challenge Zainur and even Manjit to repeat this outside of court proceedings and then sue either or both in defamation.
Alas, this was not to be.
Augustine treated this application as an attempt by Zainur to undermine the integrity of the ongoing trial and an act of contempt of court.
Augustine convicted Zainur of contempt of court.
In the course of his judgment, this is what Augustine said :
‘In considering whether the motion filed by Messrs. Zainur Zakaria and Co was contemptuous I accepted the description as to what transpired between AGP (Abdul Gani Patail) and MSD (Manjit Singh Dhillon) at the meeting as stated in the documents annexed to the motion. I must point out that the foundation of the motion was the meeting between the two persons. It was therefore unnecessary for me to look for any further evidence including the calling of witnesses. Thus there was no need for me to await an affidavit-in-reply from the Attorney General’s Chambers as all the facts were before me’.
If you want to read Augustine’s judgment in full, the same in pdf is linked below.
What Augustine had done was to treat the statement of facts narrated in Manjit’s letter and statutory declaration relating to that meeting with Gani as correct!
In fairness to Augustine, though, there does not appear to have been a request by Gani, such as Dr M has now made, that he be permitted to defend himself against these most grave of charges by way of an affidavit-in-reply.
Zainur’s appeal against this conviction was dismissed by the Court of Appeal ( Fairuz, Lamin and Mokhtar Sidin sitting ) on 5th September, 2000 but was allowed by the Federal Court on 27th june, 2001.
Steve Shim, in the course of deliverying the judgment of the Federal Court, made this observation :
‘But what about the standpoint of AGP? Was it legally proper for him to request for assistance from Nalla in the manner he did? In this respect, the learned High Court judge had, quite rightly, stated that it was within the power of the Public Prosecutor not to charge a person or to prefer a reduced charge against him if he co-operated with the police by providing information to secure the conviction of his partners in crime’.
Steve Shim then referred to some legal authorities and continued :
‘It seems evident from the passage above that the discretionary power of the Public Prosecutor is invoked only as a last resort. Two pre-requisites appear to exist, namely (1) that the Public Prosecutor considers it necessary to resort to such an exercise and (2) that the exercise should be conducted properly and fairly so as to obtain a full and free disclosure by the accomplice. Given those pre-requisites, what is the position in the instant case? Here, there was no explanation as to why AGP had thought it fit to seek the cooperation of Nalla. He had not filed any affidavit in reply nor was he called as a witness. Had he been called, he could well have explained the situation and perhaps to the satisfaction of the court. The learned High Court judge held that Nalla was an accomplice drawing particular attention to exh. ID14B, a document in the possession of the prosecution, the contents have been set out in extenso, but as I have stated, a close scrutiny of the contents therein, would disclose that he (Nalla) was only involved in the alleged relationship between DSAI and Shamsidar (the wife of his secretary) and no one else. I have also indicated that AGP had, at the meeting on 2 October 1998, sought his assistance in respect of not just one woman but specifically with five women. AGP might well have his reasons for placing a specific figure on the number of women involved but, in my view, he should have been called to extrapolate. As this was not done, we are left with an unenviable position of questioning the motive or motives of AGP’.
If you want to read the judgment of the Federal Court in full, the same in pdf is linked below.
You can see from this that simply because he had not sought to challenge the grave allegations on its merits by asserting a right to be heard and to defend himself, as Dr M now seeks to do, Gani has been left to live with a most unsavoury observation by a respected former member of the Federal Court.
‘…we are left with an unenviable position of questioning the motive or motives of AGP’.
This, however, did not impact adversely on the career advancement of Gani.
Less than six months after the decision of the Federal Court, on 1st January, 2002, His Majesty the Agong, pursuant to Article 145 of the Constitution, and on the advice of then PM, Dr M, appointed Gani AG.
May 18, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I agree Firaun has a right to his day in Court.
But, had he been more forthcoming with the RCI instead of pleading lamely ‘I cannot recall’ like a senile old man, his credibility would have been enhanced in the eye of the public. He had a grand opportunity to establish his impartiality, and fluffed it miserabily!
I suspect that he is now up to mischief in this new dare to the AAB & the Govt. He is likely to set the cat among the pigeons by disclosing a lot of irrelevant information which might lead to a lot of ‘expunging’ of testimony.
We are also entitled to ask Firaun, that if Judges, Magistrates & AG’s should not be rubbing shoulders intimately with Lawyers, Tycoons and Corporate Big-Wigs, should the PM of a nation be seen doing that while still in office?
If I were AAB, I would make sure that the famous five be investigated, taken to court and finished with by the AG, before No.6, Firaun, has his day in Court. In that way, damage to the Nation would be limited.
May 18, 2008 at 10:35 pm
very simple. just do the bidding of mahatir, you get your rewards. if the judiciary appointments can be fixed, whats the AG office.
for whatever mahatir has done for the country, all is negated by his demolition of august institutions that stand in his ways. history will judge him on this.
Appoint a commission to investigate Project IC in Sabah and dont be surprise with the findings.
May 18, 2008 at 11:19 pm
We all know that the Mahathir engineered the sacking of Salleh Abas because he (Salleh) would not play ball with him.
To be a dominant leader he needed absolute control of the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary.
Salleh was the stumbling block which had to be removed.
He wanted pet poodles who would be at his beck and call, to play his game and dance to his tune.
Appointing pliant Lord President and judges is winning only half the battle. He had to rope in a plient AG as well, to prepare the charge sheets. He needed a plient AG and ACA chief.
Credibility, morality and uprighteousness of the candidates were never the criteria in these appointments.
May 18, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Just wondering why our ‘beloved’ ex-PM was fidgeting when news about him to be subpoenad during Anwar’s trial 10 years ago . Why the change of heart ? Anyway since he wants to have his day in court , let us pray that his annointed successor will grant him that wish before he meet his Maker upstairs .
May 18, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Correction in the last but one paragraph.
“He needed an pliant IGP and ACA Chief as well.”
May 18, 2008 at 11:54 pm
DOCUMENT CLASSIFIED UNDER OSIBISA (OFFICIAL SECRETS, INTELLIGENCE, BANKING and INTERNAL SECURITY ACT)
FOR EYES ONLY
SOME VERY PRIVATE COMMENTS ON THE FINDINGS OF THE RCI
Rip Van Winkle
Zzzzzz. Who, what, where? why did’nt they leak it to me first?
Rosemajib
I never met her. The 2-books were all done by the book and will show no commissions were ever paid
Sil
the RCI report was stolen from 4th floor, in Dec 07. Putrajayagate!
M2M
There were 2 suitcases full of evidence in Bahasa
BDS Fujimori Toyota
It was a toothless inquiry. Zzzzzz has snatched defeat from from the jaws of victory!
A Gung Ho Generalissimo
NFA. It was a drunken monologue between two people, or possibly, more
I Raja Polis
There may be links to Tiger Beer & Anchor Beer Terrorist
ACA
We could not investigate since more than $9 changed hands
VKL
Extraditable from Timbaktu?
TSToto
Extraditable from Timbaktu?
EC
Eh Vik, can book flight to Timbaktu, ah? Make sure different itenerary, this time. The old bag can stay in KL in thedouble-storey bungalow house
FZA
How sad, we could have had an ex-parte RCI
TAM
Get me a stiff G&T. London, here I come again. Shit, can’t do that now I’m not in charge of tourism anymore.
Maha Firaun I
Now I remember. It was a malaysiasoros.con Zionist-Bush-Blair-Howard conspiracy
Maha Firaun II
The PM must resign immediately like a gentleman. That is our adat. (But sir, Firaun I was the PM at that time). Oh, I see. Then all the people must resign for misleading Firaun 1
Thiruapanama
Crazy, am I? Now who will be asking for asylum?
Go Burnem
The longer I recorded it, the more accidental it became
Wigs Samy
Ve did the wrong thing the right vay
ChuaSonofagun
Justice must be videoed to be seen doing to be seen to be done
Master Yoda
Foreman of the Jury, a verdict you have? Yes Master, guilty they are
Obi Wan Kenobi
Maha Darthvader is now down on all Fours
Judge Ididit
2 down, 38 more to go!
Don Corleone
Firaun, why didn’t you come to me before. We could have made the RCI an offer they could not have refused. Horsehead Curry & Sleeping With The Fishes
Wigs Samy (again)
This vill take a heavy 30-year toll on the people
LKYak
These Ingdian lawyer buroks ah, I suppo you can knaver thrust what they do behind chamber doors and rubber estate bushes. You get it ah, dontch know what I mean ah?
Kapak Malkitsiang
Don’t stop now. Korek, Korek,Korek!
Mahatokguru Nicholas Azizi
That’s the throuble wis Secular procedures. If My Way, all kena whipping and stone
EC Chief
I am taking the Rap for Snoopdoggydog,
I am only a humble servant, a mere cog
In da wheel of life
For another extended year of strife
May 19, 2008 at 12:13 am
There is something rotten in this nation. That rot left by Mahathir must be cleaned otherwise the virus will affect all the people and the nation will come tumbling down. For Gunny Pati-Hell, well, this nation knows him, so he is part of the rot. Saying that he should investigate the fathe of Malaysia’s evils and misdeeds is saying Razak Baginda should investigate Altantuya killers.
May 19, 2008 at 1:13 am
Saya bukan ahli politik, tetapi saya membaca sifir politik melalui pemerhatian serta pengamatan tindak-laku dan sandiwara para pelakonnya. Pelakon sandiwara politik adalah mereka yang menjadikan lapangan politik sebagai sumber pendapatannya.
Slogan dan retorik yang beraneka adalah skrip sandiwara kutu-kutu politik ini. Samada kutu-kutu ini mementaskan sandiwara politik mereka di peringkat nasional, negeri, daerah atau desa, matlamat dasar mereka adalah meraih perhatian, simpati dan sokongan rakyat demi meliliti mereka dengan kekuasaan yang lumrahnya berakhir dengan matlamat sebenar mereka – menggunungkan harta kekayaan dan wang ringgit.
Sejarah banyak membuktikan, terlalu banyak mereka yang telah berpuluh tahun berkhidmat sebagai guru atau pengetua atau pegawai PTD yang hanya mampu memiliki sebuah rumah kediaman yang sederhana dan hanya termampu memiliki kereta paling hebatpun mungkin Proton Perdana atau Honda Accord 2.0 atau Volvo secondhand.
Manusia yang sama apabila terpilih sebagai wakil rakyat samada sebagai Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri atau Ahli Dewan Rakyat dalam jangka masa 4 atau 5 tahun telah berubah menjadi jutawan dengan hartanah, kereta dan perniagaan yang berbagai dalam nilai jutaan dan mungkin puluhan juta ringgit.
http://kerajaanrakyat.blogspot.com/
May 19, 2008 at 2:35 am
Here’s another (past) event of someone else not seeking justice to clear his name -
http://jebatmustdie.wordpress.com/2008/04/24/the-crisis-of-1987-1988-is-there-a-third-side-of-a-coin/
Oh yeah… there’s an interesting article in that blog on the ‘video boy’ from KJ too.
“The truth is still out there.. somewhere”
May 19, 2008 at 8:28 am
Dear Haris,
I am writing in reference to the following line you wrote:
“Now I still think Dr M is guilty as hell, but, yes, he too, is entitled to the presumption of innocence until tried and convicted by a competent court, if indeed he is ever charged.”
Did I miss something here, Haris?
First your sentence starts by saying that you think that Dr M is ‘guilty as hell’ yet at the same time, the same sentence finishes by saying that is he is entitled to ‘the presumption of innocence until tried and convicted’.
So since DrM hasn’t been tried in court and should be, according to your words, ‘entitle to the presumption of innocence’ why do you think he is ‘ is guilty as hell’, and thereby be denied that very same presumption of innocence?
When you say that you think ‘DrM is guilty as hell’, YOU SOUND VERY,VERY CONVINCED, Haris. YET, YOU KNOW HE HASN’T BEEN TRIED.
So, can you please tell me why you are so convinced that DrM is ‘guilty as hell’ though you know, he hasn’t been tried and convicted by a competent court?
Thank you.
May 19, 2008 at 8:44 am
I vaguely remember that Dr M refused to step into court during Anwar’s trial. After stating that he had lots of proof against Anwar.
May 19, 2008 at 2:05 pm
En Haris,
Let me stray here a little,but do you think that the “Man” acquitted in the Norita S. murder trial deserved that verdict?I mean deep down inside(the lawyer in you not withstanding)Do you really believe/think that that is the truth?..I know, I’m way off the topic you were discussing but it’s just that,that case and the outcome of it is something that still bothers many..
Thanks.
Nivrem,
A public prosecution is brought on behalf of the state. That means on behalf of us.
If it fails because of insipid evidence gathering or shoddy prosecution, the fault is ours.
The law says a man who successfully defends himself on a capital punishment charge should not have to suffer double jeopardy.
We charged, tried and acquitted the accused.
It should end there.
If we put up a weak case, then yes he deserved that verdict. Any other verdict would have been perverse measured against the evidence.
May 19, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Haris,
Interesting reading the legal gobbledygook craps… and your statement that,
“Now I still think Dr M is guilty as hell, but, yes, he too, is entitled to the presumption of innocence until tried and convicted by a competent court, if indeed he is ever charged.” Alas, now I’m more convinced than ever that people believe what they want to believe, rather than honestly looking for the truth… but coming from a celebrity lawyer championing ‘justice & people’s parliament’, is a bit of a let down. But afterall, we all are human, right?
May 19, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Thank goodness there is someone like you who would take the trouble to translate legal complexities into language an ordinary layman can understand. Please keep your commentaries going. This is most helpful to the rakyat, I’m sure.
May 20, 2008 at 12:59 pm
So Mahathir has quit UMNO. So what? I say good riddance to bad rubbish. Mahathir has been bad for the country.
Obviously he is intent on deflecting attention from the investigation to be held on his role in LingamGate.. And he thinks that the way to escape it is by replacing Pak Lah with a leader who will bend to his (Mahathir’s) will so that the investigation will end up like so many others—no case to answer.
I say that whatever Pak Lah’s weaknesses may be, let us hope he reamins long enough to see this investigation against Lingam, Mahathir and the others through.
May 20, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Marina,
We all seem to have short memories… when AAB,SIL&Co. took over 4 years ago, they were gung-ho about cleaning up the govt., esp. with high-profile case of Eric Chia & Co., etc… this has potential to implicate TDM too, BUT whatever happened to it?… AAB, SIL&Co.’s state of denial and passing the bucks to his predecessor is NOT going to solve Malaysia’s problems. The problem is AAB, SIL&Co. DIDN’T even realize that THEY ARE the PROBLEM!
May 20, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Overall, I think the advent of blogging is a good thing and the pros far outnumber the cons. Unfortunately, it does lead to bloggers letting their 2 sen off without proper checking or rationale. It happens now and then and I prefer to look at the lighter side. I simply watch out for the usual arse lickers who tend to pop up as surely as night follows day to agree with whatever the blog master says. It is quite fun to watch.
I remember the case of RPK when he was slapped god knows how many millions (which he does not have - poor winner) when he lost the case brought by the university professor (whose name I do not remember) for libel. I believe it was for a posting by RPK or someone else in the blog alleging the professor is guilty of plagiarism. RPK did not even bother to file his defense and when the judgment was delivered, it was the all too familiar ‘political persecution’. If you scan the comments about this verdict,in any blog, the vast majority criticized the verdict and, as usual, lauded RPK’s stand.
Few if any felt it was necessary to defend the much maligned professor (and the university). Now, please don’t get me wrong. The guilt or otherwise of the professor is of little concern to me. What bothers me is that because a famous blogger is involved, the rights of the other party is of no consequence. Well, the laws say he has a right to defend his integrity regardless of what others may think. And I believe the laws also say that RPK has every right to show what was published was fair comment. But he didn’t. And the majority of his followers treated him like a hero for that. Damn arse lickers.
May 21, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Leave the Mamak Mahathir to have another heart attack soon, very soon.
He is just trying to divert the cabinet’s attention from his involvement on the appointment of Judges. Even his son is staying on in UMNO, hoping and dreaming to become the next UMNO Youth Leader to become the next keris waiver or even the P.M.one day, fat hope, fat hope and fat hope!
By to day the Mamak must be very disappointed that all the UMNO Ministers are backing AAB and not resigning from UMNO. The Malays are not longer fools enough to believe or trust you ? You can fool them before but not anymore, sorry Mamak?
May 21, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Calling all Malaysians, go out and make a donation to help the cyclone-ravaged people of Myanmar and the earthquake-devastated people of Sichuan.
The accumulated good that will accrue will rid Malaysia of all the evil perpetrated by the evil doers. The universal law of cause and effect in action
May 22, 2008 at 5:39 am
Ethically or Legally Guilty!
===========================
If the Court in Malaysia is as trustworthy as other well administrated countries. I am sure most will rest the benefit of doubts to court.
However, the facts are many are ethically shameless with breach of laws in the eyes of many that ethically, many DO NOT HAVE DOUBTS that they are evil. Many are “Technically” not guilty. But, in straight legal sense, if with all the procedures in order, how many could escape as not Guilty?
Would DR M challenge anyone to take him to court if the Court are really place for Justice?
Same go for the EC Chief!!
Another important question is - Is AG functioning as he should be?