The ONLY way to go. Malik Imtiaz Sarwar explains in very simple terms (I have a feeling it's more for Nazri's benefit than ours) why a Royal Commission - and not the Investigative Panel set up by the Government - is the ONLY way to go to resolve the judiciary crisis.
1. A Royal Commission has powers conferred on it by law to take all necessary fact finding steps in order to achieve its purpose. This is important as the Commission would have to otherwise depend on the largesse of parties concerned.
2. The special Investigative Panel has no powers in law to compel the surrendering of documents, the attendance of witnesses and so on. The Investigative Panel is appointed by the Government. The Government is implicated and CANNOT be involved in the investigation."It is not enough that the Government declares that the Investigative Panel will be left to do what it has to do. The mere fact of an association with the Government already undermines the process. The aim is to restore public confidence in the Judiciary. The public will not be confident if the Government is involved."Read the lawyer's latest posting Why a Royal Commission is the ONLY way to go to understand the issue and get a grasp on what's at stake for our future.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Lingam tape: The correct, correct way to go
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Anwar’s de-dollarisation: Will it hurt Malaysia?
D edollarisation is a process of substituting US dollar as the currency used for (i) trading oil and/or other commodities, (ii) buying US do...
03 Mar : The aerotrain at our main airport, KLIA, is quite old. Last century technology. But the trains have served us well. They have done ...
Nov 23: The 16th Yang DiPertuan Agong has probably seen more political drama than all his predecessors combined. Since assuming the throne ...
Why don't they just form The Royal Circus....then everybody can watch especially pagi raya kat tv.ReplyDelete
for the benefit of Nazri? goosh, anything thats not in line with his thoughts is considered rubbish. afterall, his role is to protect his colleagues in the ruling party. it doesnt whether its right or wrong as long as any actions are aligned to what the powers-that-be.ReplyDelete
to hell with the idea of separation of power, untainted judiciary, corrupt free police force or independent ACA, these are considered foreign and subsersive ideas and anthema to the perpetuation power domination of the ruling party.
thats Nazri and BN for you.
We have a forest fire but we are more interested to find out whether the fire was legally or illegally started and whether the person who lit the fire had any ulterior motives.ReplyDelete
We pretend that all is well and that there's no fire.
Malik Imtiaz has been unethically going around rubbishing the judges and mixing politics with law. By seeing certain Judges discredited, he stands to benefit by the cases he has in courts.ReplyDelete
Is anyone aware abt his comments in the parliamentary hearing? He was voicing for the minority interest but in his argument, majority interest and rights have to be denied. But he goes around discrediting the hearing for asking him to speak in malay. Hansard is available to read.
As lawyers and officers of the court, Malik Imtiaz and Harris IBrahim, should be arguing his cases in court rather than trying to influence public opinion and drumming up public sentiment to influence the court outcome. In many cases, this dynamic duo has been presenting to the public a very skewed view and incomplete picture of the legal issues they represent. It is actually unethical to do so and discuss his cases in public and blog.
The problem is Bar Council are unprofessional and political. They have become a very dogmatic group rather than promoting and improving professionalism of lawyers. Other than not reprimanding ppl like Harris and Malik, Bar Council have not addressed the corrupt practices of its members.
Lawyers seemed to support themselves but not the legal consumers. They have oftenly take advantage their exclusive knwoledge of the law to misled cleinst and exorbitantly charge naive clients. Why is Bar council not promoting and helping clients to sue their lawyers?
I support the march but I do not want justice to be robbed by certain interested party.
BTW can someone confirm if there is truth that the Bar Council President is the niece of Gopal Sri Ram. If it so, she should disqualify herself for her uncle stand to benefit from her advocacy to review Judges appointment.
Correct correct correct correct correct !God Bless Us .ReplyDelete
I have always asked myself this question: Why is Nazri, as a Minister in the PM Dept, supposedly a Minister to advise the PM, seem to be taking a stand that tends to embarrass the PM and this Govt.
And he is no fool, not one with a kampung mentality. He is a lawyer, articulate and literate. He cannot be as dumb as he looks when he opens his mouth.
It would appear that there is much more sinister intentions in Nazri's motive to make this Govt very unpleasant to the voters.
What he says represents the views of PAk Lah's govt. Remember, he has no ministerial portfolio. He is a Minister without portfolio .. a Minister of the PM's Dept.
So when he opens his mouth, he is technically representing the views of the PM and this Govt.
And he has deliberately presented himself as rude,crude and totally unpalatable to the voters.
One cannot really believe that a politician who still aspires higher positions would want to present himself as so unpopular as he is. And he is not addressing the kampung gallery. He is taking on his professional colleagues, the lawyers and the urban voters.
The rumours that are going around even in UMNO circles that Nazri is the lightning rod for destabilising Pak Lah as PM. A perverse way to destabilise from the inside.
There is no point in trying to educate Nazri on this LIngam tape scandale. He KNOWS what needs to be done to address the judiciary scandal.
I think as the grapevine voices are saying, he is a the pitbull for another in UMNO !!!
The consistent position Nazri is taking seems to point to one conclusion. He is a destabiliser and deliberately so for a very sinister reason within the politics of UMNO.
To Anonymous of 3:47 PM …ReplyDelete
You are no knight in shiny amour, sir. And i believe you are a him.
You wish to appear noble yet you completely gave yourself away with your last paragraph. And you dare have the temerity to state “I support the march but I do not want justice to be robbed by certain interested party”?
Who are you trying to kid?
i’d like to put it to you that you are the interested party who is out to rob justice. Your convoluted comment surreptitiously hides a personal agenda and until you are capable of being coherent in your arguments for your case i would urge you to refrain from making a further ass of yourself.
You are tripping all over yourself. And you clearly demonstrate that you have a shallow view and lack real understanding of the issues you are trying to be gallant of.
i dare say you are nothing more than a coward out to obfuscate. How else would you explain yourself by hiding behind anonymity?
What is so difficult about setting up a Royal Commission? We must be sincere in what we do. There is an obvious need to clean up the judiciary so that the rakyat regains the confidence. The resistence to setting up a Royal Commission only makes one wonder why and is there something to hide.ANYWAY it was alleged to occur during mahathir time so why is the current govt so takut.ReplyDelete
somethin i want to share with you all this morningReplyDelete
from timesonline.co.uk :-
The wife, daughter and hated son-in-law of Burma’s secretive leader left the country last week, the opposition Democratic Voice of Burma has reported.
The Oslo-based radio station, which receives information from a network of dissidents within the country, said that Kyaing Kyaing, the wife of Than Shwe, had arrived with other family members in Singapore, the elite’s favourite destination for shopping and hospital trips.
sounds familiar especially those SIL and Singapore words... hahahhahaha!
agreed with e-woon comments about anon 3.47pmReplyDelete
hey, anon if you want to levy accusations against haris and malik, be more specific and with supporting facts. the readers are matured to evaluate. else, rest your case.
again, you tried to insinuate on the partiality of the Bar President and a senior judge's stand or behaviour just because of their distant family relationship. thats hitting below the belt. by the way, anon, your accusations sound more Nazri-like, shallow and without basis.
Anon 3:47. I cant figure out who you are speaking for. For a start, the two people you are attempting to put down are not obscure emergency-ward lawyers. The are human rights lawyers. The are public figures. They publicly chastise when human rights or the constitution are bandied around. They have shown courage. They speak out. The dare to engage. If, as you say, they should not blog about issues, there is always the judge to caution them or alap them with contempt of court. I have yet to hear anyone on the bench do that in respect of these two gallant lawyers. Malik and Haris are real life people. They have body and soul. YOU? You spout nonentities and preach from whatever sawdust tower you are currently atop. People like you who cant make a genuine stand, usually hideS under SOMEBODY'S SKIRT....IN THIS CASE ANONYMITY. Smell the coffee son, and come down before your sawdust edifice,you pontificate from, crumble. Have a good day (to reflect, please).ReplyDelete
Self-denial is a super-terrible state.ReplyDelete
WHATEVER WAY, the verdict is not guilty as charged!ReplyDelete
They will not be able to prove the identity of the man on the other side of the conversation. And furthermore there is NO WAY to prove that this conversation was REALLY TOOK PLACE!. Even if they check the telephone calling records, and if the record matched, still there is no way to confirm that the controversial conversation took place at that point of time.
Lingam can just call the judge and talk about golf or any shit, the next day he doesn't have to call the judge, but he can just pretend talking to the judge again, as he was fixing something and video record it. Then gave the video to Anwar and Anwar can blow the issue to national level. Somebody can check the record with telephone company if Linggam really talk to the judge, and yes he did!
Unless someone has recorded the actual telephone conversation, or else we are just wasting our time.
I agree with Anon 3.47. Haris and Imtiaz have an agenda and its not about "justice", nor "being righteous".ReplyDelete
When one officer of the court rubbish a Judge, to third parties, he/she does not respect the fact the Judge has been appointed by HM Seri Paduka Baginda Yang DiPertuan Agong, with the consent of Majlis Raja Raja.
Yes, I heard about the Parliamentary Select Committee where Imtiaz presented to MPs (BN and Oppositions alike). He even rubbished the Islamic Banking system that Bank Negara is advocating.
The fact that Haris seriously contemplating to challenge Shahrizat Jalil in Lembah Pantai this coming GE, shows that his People's Parliament has serious political agenda. Nevermind the fact that Tun Salleh Abbas and the Mighty Zainur Zakaria also lost in the same ground, the previous GEs.
Haris must make a statement and this episode is his latest calling card.
Like it or not, this is politics, the legal practitioners way of doing things.
Politics is politics, regardless how its presented!
When is the last time, a request for a Royal enquiry was ever granted?ReplyDelete
Very scientific analysis on Nazri Aziz. What about from the art of politics perspective?
"he/she does not respect the fact the Judge has been appointed by HM Seri Paduka Baginda Yang DiPertuan Agong, with the consent of Majlis Raja Raja."ReplyDelete
Hmm... more accurately,
The judges were nominiees by the Prime Minister and Chief Justice, if the Majlis Raja Raja agree, the DYMM Seri Paduka Baginda Yang DiPertuan Agong will decide if he wants to sign the appointment.
Well, I think the royal families have no power to nominate judge. So, setting pressures on the royal families on such responsibility is not fair.
The lawyers spoke on issues most citizen would agree on or support. And I can see why some people has been trying to relate these lawyers to politics, coz' that's when they (the government) can then treat them as opposition policians and ignore them. Wasn't that's what Nazri said?
You gotta call it the way you see it, some people see malik and haris as politicians masquerading as lawyers and there is a kernel of truth in thatReplyDelete
If they want to be pollitician, they had better have some good moves to stay afloat
Will there be a corek corek song in the internet youtube soon?ReplyDelete
I'm sure it's a Melaka and not Meluku song!ReplyDelete
Man, you know nothin.The panel will report that it cannot confirm or deny anything in the tape is true. So no evidence. Panel knows nothing. Maybe rakyat knows something but it cannot prove it, can it? Panel members will each get another gong (medal)for public (I spelt that with a 'l", okay?)service. Malaysian semua boleh!ReplyDelete