Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Defiant Mahathir dares Najib to punish him

 Master of Manipulation does not equal master of statecraft.  Of course he could have done surgeries well! Remember how he cut off his many deputies one by one? Well executed surgeries but poor diagnosis and prognosis though..But I'm glad didn't call him a statesman,steal billions from the rakyat's coffers by using NEP, proxies,inflated contracts, cheating and hiding behind the OSA and fix up anyone using ISA.As a doctor, I have to work hard and earn an honest living. which he certainly isn't.The root of all kind of evil starts from here.corruption,racism,dismantling of the country's instituition. Mahathir's snide remark confirming that all those in the present government and in politics are there for the money only. This man's wit is still razor sharp. Too sharp nowadays until it's become more of a double edged sword. The Prime Minister’s income is not fantastic when compared to the doctor’s income in the private sector but what is fantastic is the hundreds of millions or billions the crooked and corrupt Prime Ministers make from crooked deals such as the IPPs, Scorpenes and 1MDB for Mahathir politic in Malaysia pays better...allegedly US$44 billion for his familyThe state of our Judiciary is shocking and tragic. After the impeachment of Salleh Abas, things degenerated Syed Ahmad Idid is vindicated. We need people who can stand up to injustice and fraud in every department if the government, but not many dare do it as it affects their rice bowl. It will not be soon that we can hope for an honest system, infact every thing is going the other way. I pray that Syed Ahmad Idid will be fairly rewarded for his bravery and loss.Ex-High Court Judge Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid
“Nothing could have brought some good cheer to a nation in crisis than when PM Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi announced that the government was making goodwill ex-gratia payments to Tun Salleh Abas and the other five judges of the great 1988 judicial earthquake. What a welcome gust of fresh air, never mind even if DPM Datuk Seri Najib Razak saw the need to say that the payments were not a form of apology. We do not know how much a ‘real’ apology would be adequate recompense to careers so tragically terminated and lives left almost in shambles for close to 20 years. And these are not ordinary lives! These are decent, honest, God-fearing individuals who, with their counterparts in the rest of the civil service, represent some of the best that this country has – public servants who acquit themselves in the most exemplary manner with the highest professional standards in a civil service known for probity. We all seem to have forgotten one more victim.
Sometime in the late 70s, a Malaysian, one Mr. Syed Ahmad Idid, arrived to serve as circuit judge in Brunei Darussalam. Two comments attributed to him alerted everyone there that he was a man to watch. The first was a case in which he highlighted the invaluable role played by the Fourth Estate and the need to preserve that role: a man was charged in court for assaulting a reporter who had exposed illicit withdrawals from an ailing finance company by vested interests. The second was when he commented on ‘advocacy’, rather, the lack of it in the courts. He thought that there was much for everyone to gain if this commendable practice was re-invigorated by the legal fraternity. The comments he made were informed, deliberate expositions of a sharp legal mind.
It was no surprise that many held that he was the typically well-educated, fair-minded and articulate judge in the best tradition of an incomparable judicial system. When no more was heard of him there, we knew that what was Brunei ’s loss would be Malaysia ’s gain; he was destined for greater things.
I have no doubt the good man has never wavered in his search for truth and justice. Nomadic politicians aside, men like him do not possess a nomadic conscience nor do they sell their honour by mere relocation. On the contrary, they become larger than life with the passage of time until fate intervenes, that is, the critical moment of having to choose to do certain things one considers worth doing. Often this entails taking enormous risks, not unlike that taken by a US senator from long ago who was ostracized and ruined for defending a rival. “I looked into my own open grave” came from an exceptionally brave raja manusia . (“Profiles in Courage” by John F Kennedy should be required reading for politicians and senior civil servants).
This same man, now Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid, stares into your eyes as the High Court Judge who was forced to resign for taking the risk of making the distress call (less graciously ‘whistle-blowing’) about the goings-on in the judiciary. It must surely reflect very grimly of the courts, if one of its own was forced to write a 33-page expose.
We will never know how he felt when he did what he did, but the dilemma he faced was real: raise the alarm and face the real prospect of self-immolation, but with it a glimmer of hope of restoring the erstwhile paradigm for social justice, i.e, equal adjudication through equal laws for unequal peoples and unequal conditions; or stay silent and stand condemned, sometime in the future, for being party to the systemic dismantling of the whole judicial process. In the harsh, surreal environment of the post-1988 period, it was easy for ordinary mortals not to exhibit alarm, even easier not to show abhorrence for scandalous behaviour. This was the unenviable conundrum he faced in 1996. I salute his ultimate decision but I bemoan the fact that years of dedicated, and I would dare believe, illustrious service have come to naught – not a cent in pension or compensation. Such is the price he has paid and continues to pay. Such is the act that moved the then Attorney-General, the late Datuk Mohtar Abdullah, to state that what he, Mohtar, did to extract the resignation from him was not because a ‘pistol’ was pointed at his (Mohtar’s) neck but a ‘cannon’! No travesty of justice is more complete than this.
Four words in Malay, put together in a specific order, adat pulau limburan pasang is a germ of wisdom – the powerful shall always protect the meek, the leader offering the helping hand to the follower, ad nauseam. It is a gem, part cultural ethos, part practical philosophy and part moral compass. It goes beyond the simple social contract. Its exemplification in its highest form is one, Tunku Abdul Rahman’s gift of the land where Wisma Putra now sits, and two, the annual sponsorship for the pilgrimage to Makkah for the poor and needy by the late Seri Begawan, father of the present Sultan of Brunei Darussalam. In his lifetime he must have paid for thousands of people. This is the quintessence of enlightened, benevolent leadership of two leaders par excellence. Yet never in their lifetime did they ever proclaim to the world what they did. It was magnanimity only Malay royalty could show. They received no encomiums and asked for none. There was just gentleness, silent strength and dignity, and a lot chi as the Chinese would have it.
It is in this context of justice, leadership and chivalry so generously displayed and given in the past that, I think the best moment is at hand for our Prime Minister to start the healing of a nation. It will redound to his eternal credit for putting things right after so many years of ‘…living dangerously’. As events unravel daily in the media, I join the call made by Tunku Aziz, in his regular Sunday column, that “Syed Ahmad’s case must be revisited in the name of justice. He deserves at least that.” and “Reform should begin with his case and proceed from there.” I would add that a need for foreign expertise to ensure complete impartiality in the conduct of a tribunal or a Commission of Judicial Review, should include jurists, one each from Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia and Pakistan. I have associated with people from these three countries to know that they have eminently qualified, level-headed men from the Bench. Nothing could be fairer to all parties.
The enfeeblement of this nation must end.”
During his more than two decades in power, Dr Mahathir Mohamad has been accused of numerous things, ranging from being a despot to a corrupt politician.
EXCLUSIVE Following recent revelations by former Court of Appeal Judge KC KC VohrahVohrah of questionable actions by ex-Chief Justice Eusoff Chin, the man who had first revealed judicial corruption in Malaysia feels quietly vindicated.Syed Ahmad Idid Syed Abdullah Idid was the High Court Judge who was forced to resign for writing an anonymous letter exposing the matter in 1996, which was sent to a select set of high officials.
Among its allegations, it revealed Eusoff had gone on a New Zealand holiday with VK Lingam, a senior lawyer who appeared before the then Chief Justice in court on a number of cases.Pictures of the duo taken together with their families underscored their close ties. It resulted in Syed Ahmad Idid being told to resign when the letter he sent mysteriously found its way into some government departments and then spread to the media.
Syed Ahmad Idid’s immediate reaction to Malaysiakini’s article on Vohrah was elation – that the former Court of Appeal Judge had written on the matter and he was certain other Judges could also tell of similar experiences.Among other transgressions, the Ayer Molek case that Vohrah referred to was filed in the Special and Appellate Powers Division whereas it should have been in the Commercial Division.
Syed Ahmad Idid (above center) also recalled a similar incident as a Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge with the Commercial Division from 1995 to 1996.
According to him, a case involving a sum of a quarter of a billion ringgit was correctly filed in the Commercial Division before him. But before it could be called in open court, the file was wrested away by Eusoff. “That matter was given to another judge who now resides, and must be enjoying life, in Europe,” he quipped.
Appalled at Corruption
Syed Ahmad Idid was a former Assistant Director with The Royal Customs and Excise Department before he left to read law in the Inner Temple London. He was legal director of a bank before being appointed a High Court Judge in 1990. In 1996, appalled at the corruption and dubious practices in the corridors of justice, he turned whistleblower.
eusoff chin and vk lingam
He remembers that his anonymous complaint over misconduct in the Judiciary, especially on the then Lord President  Eusoff Chin (above with VK Lingam), was sent to a few top government officers whose duties he hoped included enhancing the standards of performance in the government and protecting the integrity of the country.
Unfortunately someone in a department had disseminated it to the media, along with a ‘covering note’.“The aim was to frame me. The then Attorney-General (the late Mokhtar Abdullah) – a reader of English fiction – described this as a ‘poison pen’ letter.”
Somehow the letter was traced back to him and he was given two options – to resign honourably or be detained, possibly under the Internal Security Act.
A senior official, representing the A-G, had met him armed with the offer, revealed Syed Idid.He said Mokhtar was seen as overly enthusiastic to kill the ‘poison pen’ letter writer rather than investigating the allegations made against Eusoff. “He went to the press as though he was out for revenge.”Queried why he did not fight back, Syed Ahmad Idid said as a judge he could not join the political fray.
“I had no political party and so no political pull or push. The press jumped in and wrote all sorts of things against me. A reporter wrote I had escaped to London. In reality, I was eating ‘nasi lemak’ right here in Section 21, Petaling Jaya.
Even a Professor took advantage by writing about people who wrote poison-pen letters. So the lies mounted. But the newspapers which printed the lies paid dearly through their falling sales,” the former Judge said.
Threat of imprisonment
Asked as to why he did not take legal action, Syed Ahmad Idid said he was threatened with imprisonment. “I had a heart attack the previous year. Naturally I was fearful I could not survive the ordeal of a prison or even a lock-up stay. Also I had no savings to engage counsel and had no hope for the ‘justice that money can buy’.4th PM of Malaysia“So you see my predicament.
I made ‘doa’ and learned that discretion is the better part of valour.” Syed Ahmad Idid added he believed then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad relied a lot on his advisers and as Mokhtar held the reins, the PM had no alternative but to believe what the A-G told him.
“I did not contact the former A-G or the former IGP. Both knew my complaints were not investigated. On the contrary, I, the complainant, was punished. Thankfully, I have genuine friends both in the government, the courts and also the private sector who support me a lot, (and) I am grateful. Naturally I wish they can get UMNO to push for remedial action in my favour. However I guess UMNO is busy with so many issues.”
Lingam was later implicated in a video showing him having a phone conversation with then Chief Judge of Malaya (Tun) Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Halim in 2001 over the fixing of judges. This eventually led to a Royal Commission of inquiry in 2008 to investigate the issue.
The five-member panel proposed action be taken on Lingam, Eusoff and four others including Mahathir. However until today, no action has been taken against any of the six.
“After the Lingam inquiry, there should have been “korek, korek and korek” (dig, dig and dig) for more truths,” Syed Ahmad Idid sighed in dejection, playing on the now legendary Lingam’s “correct, correct, correct” quote that was caught on the video.
However in a manner of speaking, Syed Ahmad Idid had the last laugh. He received many calls and text messages congratulating him on being vindicated for the revelations he made more than a decade before the infamous video was made public.
Compensation received
He has also seen former Lord President Salleh Abas and five other Supreme Court Judges being compensated in 2008.
In 1988, following the UMNO debacle in which the party was declared illegal by the court, Salleh and other Supreme Court judges were forced to resign. Two decades later the government under Abdullah Ahmad Badawi decided the Judges were hard done by, and granted compensation and returned their pensions. Syed Ahmad Idid now hopes the government will similarly look into the injustice done to him.
“I hope the government would remedy the wrong done to me…,” he said, stressing that he had sent his 1996 complaint to a few top government officials but did not however make it public. In fact, a professional forensics expert could easily confirm that the typeset, font and paper of that covering note and the attachment could not have come from me but from a department over which I had no control.”
Syed Ahmad Idid’s only regret was that he had been perceived to be an opposition sympathiser after the late Karpal Singh spoke well of him in Parliament when news of his resignation became public and again in 2006. This, he said, had resulted in some within the government branding him as an opposition supporter.
According to Syed Ahmad Idid, he was informed of this by a former cabinet minister. “I was denied any form of support. How more injudicious can the country get,” he said. Despite this, Syed Ahmad Idid is glad that current Judges, especially those appointed by the Judicial Appointments Commission, are of quality, possessing experience and qualifications.
“This is essential in persons chosen to administer justice. A few may be young or ‘belum masak’ (not mature). But so long as they gather knowledge day by day and are fiercely honest and impartial, our judiciary will move a long way from the Eusoff Chin regime,” he remarked.
After his premature end in government service, Syed Ahmad Idid has kept himself busy with visits to the Inner Temple, his alma mater, and the International Court of Justice in The Hague as well as studying the plight of Muslims in Mindanao. He has written extensively on the negotiations between Manila and Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and on basic law.
In addition to speaking at arbitration conferences overseas, Syed Ahmad Idid has participated in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (Uncitral) meetings in New York and Vienna. In 2012, Syed Ahmad Idid wrote a book titled ‘Writing of Judgments: A Practical Guide for Courts and Tribunals’.

 Hours after the Rajya Sabha unanimously adopted a resolution condemning him for calling Mahatma Gandhi a British agent and Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose a Japanese, the former Supreme Court judge, Justice Markandey Katju remained defiant and dared the upper house to punish him.

"A humble advice to the Rajya Sabha. O wonderful news ! The Rajya Sabha ( the upper House of the Indian Parliament ) has passed a resolution condemning me !

"But of course that is not enough. I must also be punished for what I said about that fake who is called the Father of the Indian Nation, and that agent of the Japanese fascists," Katju wrote on his Facebook page, in an act of defiance.

READ ALSO: Rajya Sabha condemns Markandey Katju for his remarks against Gandhi, Subhash

"A mere censure is no punishment. So some of them wanted to strip me of the perks and facilities I have as a retired Supreme Court Judge. But then again that will require amendment of the rules, because after all I am indeed a retired Supreme Court Judge.

Justice Markandey Katju: Gandhi a British agent

"May I make a humble suggestion to the Hon'ble Members of the House ( because evidently they have run out of ideas ). Just pass a resolution that immediately on my return to India I will be arrested and hanged, drawn and quartered.without any trial. Na rahe baans na baje baansuri ," Katju wrote, sharing a's story on his Facebook page.

Earlier, the Zero Hour in the Rajya Sabha saw members from opposition and treasury benches coming together to condemn Justice Katju's remarks in his blog with the entire House later unanimously adopting a resolution by a voice vote.

"This House expresses its unequivocal condemnation of the recent remarks of the former judge of the Supreme Court, Shri Justice Markandey Katju, against the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi and Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, who led the Indian National Army for the freedom of the country," said the resolution read out by the chairman and Vice President of India Hamid Ansari.

No comments:

Post a Comment