Ng Lum Yong, PKR member No. 00012, according to him, and unheard of to most of us until yesterday, revealed at a press conference in KL evidence of a possible conspiracy from within the ranks of PKR to topple Selangor MB Khalid.
The basis for his contention : a CD containing what appears to be a phone conversation between two individuals, and which Ng says he received in the mail some 10 days ago.
Ng also claims to be able to recognise the voice of one of the two individuals who feature on the CD.
According to Ng, that individual is one Ramlan, involved in an initiative called Reformis, and known to Ng for a long time.
Why did Ng choose to go public with this information?
He claims that this is out of his love for the party. He wants the party to investigate this matter. He will send a copy of the CD to the party HQ so that it can investigate this matter. He says he was neither induced nor coerced by anyone to do what he did yesterday.
What have we got here, then?
An allegation of fact and a statement as to motive.
The first, a serious allegation, is capable of verification if meticulously investigated.
Ng mentioned Ramlan of Reformis.
He says he knows this individual, who was involved in a threat to stalk the Selangor MB in the nude.
Ng clearly could assist the party in an investigation of this allegation.
As to Ng’s stated motive, what might suggest that his reasons for this revelation are other than altruistic?
A thorough investigation of this allegation that establishes the same to be baseless?
Perhaps, somewhat like Mahathir’s stated motive when he sacked Anwar on 2nd September, 1997.
Allegation of fact : Anwar was unfit to ascend to the office of prime minister given his homosexual inclinations.
Motive for the disclosure : in the interest of the nation.
At the time, no one that I knew believed Mahathir’s stated motives.
As for the allegation of fact, the farcical trial that proceeded left everyone convinced that these were trumped up charges to justify Anwar’s sacking.
And thus floundered Mahathir’s stated motives.
On the other hand, if an investigation finds the allegation well and truly made out, does not motive for the disclosure become secondary?
One of the factors taken into consideration in the evaluation of the worth of the evidence of a witness at a trial is his or her demeanour, as observed by the trial judge.
This is one of the reasons why appellate courts are slow to overturn the findings of fact of the trial judge that turn on the assessment of witnesses and their respective credibility. Appellate judges do not have the benefit of observing the demeanour of those witnesses.
I was at the press conference yesterday.
I was able to ask Ng questions and observe Ng’s demeanour sufficiently to make certain preliminary conclusions.
Most of you were not there.
Below are two video clips.
The first is of Ng’s opening statement before he played the CD for all those present to hear.
The second contains his continued press statement after the CD had been played.
Now you can assess Ng’s demeanour for yourself.
Let us also now observe the demeanour of the PKR leadership as at grapples with this latest debacle.