Abdul Gani Patail’s alleged misconducts were reportedly discussed in the meeting attended by Dr Mahathir, Mat Zain and Shafee.
November 6, 2013.Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail’s position as the Attorney General appears under threat as reports and sources say former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has met several people to discuss the top government lawyer’s misdeeds.Attorney-General (A-G) Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail what he described as ... Hassan were also involved in his prosecution infamously known as Sodomy 1.
The brute force of power has replaced the unwritten rules that governed behaviour as the primary arbiter of our actions. Protection and punishment. The two standard responses to we from a minister that both protection and punishment are necessary instruments for dealing with this problem,Back in 1998, Musa was then the deputy director of the Bukit Aman prosecution and legal department and investigation officer on the sodomy allegations against former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.
It was then when Musa claimed to have a brush with his younger politician brother Fuad, who had tried to persuade the former to side with Anwar… It all began a short while before Anwar’s sacking the decision was taken at the opening of a Police Mosque in Penang shortly before Anwar was arrested. I was told that Anwar was asked to compromise, as at that time he had launched a Jihad against nepotism, cronyism and corruption, and Mahathir was seriously worried, as Anwar had already denied funds to bail out Mahathir’s son in the 1967 crisis, it was a week before Merdeka 1997 if I am not mistaken.Sodomy 1, Sodomy 2, Altantuya, PKFZ etc. All the worms will crawl out of the woodwork Mahathir is so fearful of losing. One can say his life depend on hanging on to power. The blame game will start once Mahathir is arrested. The first one to squeal will be Gani Petai followed by those in the police and MACC and senior public servants. You see, they would want to save their own skin and will plea bargain . Just watch when thing unfold. As the saying goes, every dog will have his day.Mat Zain, Any sane person devoid of any form of vested interest, actually are convinced of the true story. OK we might not be privy to some of the disclosures that you have made or alleged. Nonetheless, the truth is crystal clear except for the “non so blind, as he who would not see”. Allah works in the most peculiar ways. All the truth will come out sooner or later. HOWEVER if it is not to be in this life, Mahathir, Gani, Musa, Rodwan, Umi (or whoever), deep down inside, know, that a Day will come when they will be confronted with the truth, and that THEY WOULD HAVE TO JUSTIFY THEIR VERSION. I feel easy. I will wait for that day with ALL of them!
Amiable ribbing or deliberate putdown?
Judge Richard Malanjum was hearing against the appointment of Muhammad Shafee Abdullah and said the choice of probables was not fair. took everyone by surprise as he entered their court hall and said, "The selection is unfair. I am also a part of the judiciary."The A.G is becoming a subject of public ridicule." The statement comes from none less than the Judge Richard Malanjum pointed out that events of the court were being followed across the country
Were is Gani patail? I will presume that most if not all of you have seen what happens in the Court of Appeal for example, not short of oaths of all sorts. You mean like Abdul Gani Patail is the J. Edgar Hoover of Malaysia ? ... the AG are working hand in gloves as exemplified in the Sodomy 1 trial.
“So you are a mercenary, lah,” quipped judge Richard Malanjum from the bench yesterday while Muhammad Shafee Abdullah was holding forth.The Senior Counsel was expatiating on the list of parties and politicians he had appeared for in the course of a long career – a variety, he submitted, that would attest his professional skills more than his partisan affiliations.A titer of laughter ran through the crowd at the Federal Court as Malanjum interjected to make the comment. But the matter at hand – a defendant’s right to a fair trial – was not a trifling one.The appointment of Umno lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah as ad-hoc deputy public prosecutor in the Sodomy II appeal is a dangerous precedent which gives the impression that the Attorney-General's Chambers is incompetent, said former AG Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman.
Abu Talib said there are many experienced officers, including the solicitor-general, to conduct the appeal which he considers a "straight forward case".
"Why take an outsider?"Abu Talib, who was AG for 13 years from 1980, said the question of conflict of interest did not arise because investigations papers on Gani could be handled by the Solicitor-General.
"The law clearly states that in the absence of the AG, the Solicitor-General exercises all powers and performs the functions," he said.
Abu Talib said all procedures must be followed as the country was governed by the rule of law.
Lawyers for Liberty, however, took a stronger stand against Gani. Its co-founder and adviser Eric Paulsen said if there was a question mark over the ability of the AG, the prime minister could ask him to resign.
"If there was any wrongdoing by Gani, the prime minister can advise the king to set up a tribunal to try the AG," he added.Gani, 58, joined the AG's Chambers in 1980 and was appointed AG in 2002.
The Sabahan had come under heavy criticism from the opposition and non-governmental organisations over his handling of several high profile cases, including the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder and the acquittal of Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik in a cheating trial in the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) case.
Precision in the making and interpretation of the law are an integral part of its panoply so that one cannot make light of a ranking judge’s remark such as Malanjum’s, more so when that advocacy is being commandeered for a public prosecutorial role that, by definition, is free of any presumption of bias.Are you who try to bend our perceptions under the impression that the people of Malaysia are really so stupid?Because, people have started joining the dots, across the country.
What happens in the Court of Appeal today, forcing accountability out of government, will happen across the country tomorow.After all, if our King can run the highest office in the country on the strength of an OathAnd that's an oath that many have taken, that they will see this happen, soon.
It concerned whether Shafee, who has been prolific in advocacy of clients regarded as adverse to the defence, could perform without presumptive bias the Deputy Public Prosecutor’s role in the government’s appeal of the High Court acquittal for sodomy of Anwar Ibrahim.Malanjum made the remark as Shafee was attempting to rebut the defence argument that he was a political partisan, a hack with a bias for UMNO briefs.
Anwar’s lawyers had argued that Shafee’s past advocacy on behalf of a political entity seen as patently adverse towards their client had saddled him with bias sufficient to disqualify him for the role of DPP in the government’s appeal of Anwar’s acquittal.
Whether Malanjum’s comment was amiable ribbing or deliberate putdown, the nature of the profession is such that no lawyer can behave like a mercenary and at the same time be true to the profession’s ethics.
It would be a suicidal loss of essence to the concept of the Rule of Law if an officer of the court is motivated by mercantile considerations: a duty to the service of justice which underpins the whole concept of law’s rule and an attitude of hiring oneself out to munificent bidders is like water and oil – they can’t mix.
Given the gravity and majesty of the Rule of Law, Malanjum’s remark about the range of Shafee’s clients cannot be viewed as innocuous banter.
But Shafee (right) chose to interpret it in the spirit of Humpty Dumpty who famously held that “A word is anything I say it means”
But Shafee (right) chose to interpret it in the spirit of Humpty Dumpty who famously held that “A word is anything I say it means”
However, the Rule of Law and the words used to formulate and interpret it cannot adopt the attitude of Humpty Dumpty whose creator, Lewis Carol, it is instructive to recall, was a mathematician and logician.
Precision in the making and interpretation of the law are an integral part of its panoply so that one cannot make light of a ranking judge’s remark such as Malanjum’s, more so when that advocacy is being commandeered for a public prosecutorial role that, by definition, is free of any presumption of bias.
Also, the practice of law is a tradition, with a known set of rules and attached meanings.This tradition is an accumulation of nuance given pith and moment by the behaviour of the profession’s leading lights.
Evidence given by a critical witness
In the course of his submissions yesterday on the matter of his fitness for the role of DPP, Shafee mentioned that he had assisted the late and eminent Raja Aziz Addruce in a 1987 court case that eventuated in the illegalisation of UMNO.
Judge Harun Hashim’s decision to render UMNO illegal triggered a concatenation that saw then Lord President Tun Salleh Abas hauled before an international tribunal of judges to be impeached, an episode that Salleh’s predecessor, Tun Suffian Hashim, would bemoan as the most “shameful” in our judicial history.
Perhaps the most excruciating aspect of the whole charade was the presence as head of the tribunal of Abdul Hamid Omar, the Judge who stood, in terms of promotion, to gain from Salleh’s impeachment.
Salleh was impeached and Hamid duly promoted to the vacant Lord President’s position.
After that, for as long as Hamid was head of the judiciary, Raja Aziz (left), the Bar’s preeminent member at that time, chose as a matter of principle not to appear before any panel of the apex court that included Hamid.
After that, for as long as Hamid was head of the judiciary, Raja Aziz (left), the Bar’s preeminent member at that time, chose as a matter of principle not to appear before any panel of the apex court that included Hamid.
The protest meant that Raja Aziz had to forgo much in the way of professional fees. This is the type of conduct that added several cubits to Raja Aziz’s already high standing among peers and lent luster to the ethical bases on which the legal profession stands.
Shafee has been on public record on the line of argument he will take in the appeal of Anwar’s acquittal for sodomy.
From what he has said, he will necessarily rely on the evidence given by a critical witness, DSP Jude Pereira, whose handling of DNA exhibits High Court judge Zabidin Mohd Diah found to be unreliable and, therefore, inadmissible as a basis for convicting Anwar of sodomy.
In a Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) inquiry in 2009, as panel chairperson, Shafee impugned the probity of the same Police Officer whom the chair found unreliable as a witness in a matter concerning the violation of the rights of five lawyers who had complained to the commission on their treatment.
Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah Surrogacy in justice for Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail
On the Federal Court ruling today, Anwar said it now meant that even Karpal Singh could prosecute Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as conflict of interest was no longer an issue.
Cynicism is never irrational. The irrational, often wrong, sometimes right, are impelled by instinct, heart or even conscience. Cynics are morality-proof. They prefer data to truth Mere Mockery of a Trial’:dramatic work in which highly improbable plot situations, exaggerated characters, and often slapstick elements are used for humorous effect
Abdul Gani Patail: never doubted his ability, decision runs according to script Justice is about Mahathir's posturing
No comments:
Post a Comment