Friday, March 28, 2008

"I did so because that is what the PM wanted" is not an EXCUSE... or is it?

Well, interesting things about Zaid Ibrahim...and that is why MEMORY is sometimes important as well - true that people can change but we have to bit more cautious about some of these 'de facto law ministers..." (A relevant NST Report dated 6/11/1991 is attached below..)

Was it not Rais Yatim, when out of cabinet, was an active advocate for the repeal of the ISA who when made a Minister did an about turn on his previously public-declared position.

Can ZEBRAs ever lose their stripes? But then there was another famous son of Ibrahim who apparently have repented his ways and have 'lost his stripes', and as such nothing is impossible...Malaysia Boleh.

Anyway what does this Zaid Ibrahim say about the way UMNO elections for the President, etc is conducted? The necessity to get nominations from Divisions is already bad - when nominations should be from members. To that, then you have the need for so many Divisions to nominate you before you can be a candidate and contest for the post. (Wonder whether there is still that rule that translate each nominations automatically to so many votes..?) FEAR of repercussion will ensure that generally Divisions will nominate this fair? Make your stand on this -- Minister Zaid Ibrahim?

Dr Mahathir has an argument, yes.... after all there was those Tribunals (and do not come now and said that you sat as 'judges' and decided so because that is what the then PM wanted...). The head of SUHAKAM now, the AG that time who advised and went along must also apologize...

Back to Zaid Ibrahim -- when exactly was he appointed as Senator....and WHY was he appointed Senator for the Federal Constitution clearly stipulates the reasons why persons can be appointed as a Senator --- and "because the PM wants to include me in his Cabinet" is definitely not a reason why the YDP Agung can make someone a Senator.

Dr M: Ask the tribunal to apologise
Mar 28, 08 1:36pm
“Ask the tribunal to apologise.”

This was the direct retort of former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad to calls for him to apologise for the ‘wrongs’ surrounding the 1988 judicial crisis.

lingam tape inquiry day 4 170108 mahathirIn remarks written by him which was published today by English daily The Sun, Mahathir said the dismissal of former Lord President Mohd Salleh Abbas and Supreme Court judges Wan Sulaiman Pawanteh and George Seah were not his doing.

He, therefore, feels no obligation to apologise.

If any party were to apologise, it should be the members of the tribunal led by Hamid Omar which sacked Salleh, said Mahathir.

Mahathir also said he was open to the authorities investigating his person for any “misdeeds” during his 22 years as Prime Minister.

“Unless there is a frame-up, I think there should be nothing to pin on me,” he said.

Moving on to the suggestion by DAP national chairperson Karpal Singh that he apologise for the 1988 debacle - which many regard as ‘the darkest moment’ for the judiciary - Mahathir said on this point his conscience was clear.

“Even other accusations against me, including the dismissal of judges, were not my doing and I do not feel obliged to apologise. Ask the tribunal to apologise,” he said.

Being more correct than correct

Taking a potshot at Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Zaid Ibrahim - who had asked for the government to apologise for the sacking and suspension of the five judges - Mahathir said the lawyer had “forgotten” that he had supported the then-government for its actions.

judiciary forum lingam tape 171107 salleh abbas palace of justic“The person asking that the government should apologise for what happened to Tun Salleh Abbas may have forgotten that as President of the Muslim Lawyers Association, he fully supported the action that was taken,” said Mahathir.

“He castigated the Bar Council for condemning Tun Hamid Omar over the dismissal of judges. Now he wants to be more correct than correct. I wonder why,” he added.

In 1988, Mahathir had convened the special tribunal to try Salleh on charges of misconduct and for questioning constitutional amendments that seriously eroded the powers of the judiciary.

Supreme Court judges George Seah and Wan Sulaiman - who had ruled that the tribunal was convened unconstitutionally - were also sacked after being found guilty of misconduct by another tribunal.

Three other judges - Azmi Kamaruddin, Eusoffe Abdoolcader and Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh were suspended.

Probe misconduct in Terengganu

In his article, Mahathir also suggested investigations - preferably by “credible foreign agencies” - should be conducted to look into allegations that abuse of power and misconduct had led the Teregganu royal palace to reject Barisan Nasional’s (BN) initial choice for menteri besar (MB).

According to him, rumour has it that various “unnecessary and wasteful” state projects worth billions of ringgit had been contracted to outsiders behind whom are members of ‘the first family’.

abdullah ahmad badawi and idris jusoh and ahmad said and terengganuIt was also alleged that Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had “influenced” former MB Idris Jusoh who was responsible for such a state of affairs and from which he had “benefitted financially”, said Mahathir.

“These are all rumours. It will be quite impossible to prove anything as the perpetrators are skilled in hiding themselves,”he said.

He also said that the public was “leery” of investigations by government agencies and departments.

“The people believe, not true of course, that the government has been interfering with the work of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), the Police and the Attorney General (A-G)'s Chambers. The say this is borne out by the results of investigations by these agencies,” he said.

As such, the job should be left to foreign experts to look into the matter, he added.

“The public cannot be blamed for not having faith in government agencies doing investigations. The public cannot be blamed for suspecting cover-ups by the government or worse still the government may be using these enforcement agencies to threaten people,” he said.

“To clear its good name, the government should get credible foreign agencies to do the investigation. Of course, they must be given full access to the documents etc,” he added.


Bar Council told to end feud with Tun Hamid

Wednesday, 06 November 1991 09:11am

©New Straits Times
by Azmi M. Anshar

KUALA LUMPUR, Tues. - The Muslim Lawyers Association has urged the Bar Council to end its "feud" with Lord President Tun Hamid Omar in the interest of the nation and the legal profession.

Its president, Zaid Ibrahim, said the Bar Council should dissolve itself or have its members quit en masse if it could not accept and respect Tun Hamid as Lord President.

Referring to the still valid vote of no-confidence adopted by the council on July 9, 1988, against Tun Hamid, he said the association should end its "obsession" with detecting perceived "flaws" within the judiciary.

He said the council in paying too much attention to the rift with Tun Hamid had neglected Section 42 (1L) of the Legal Profession Act which states that the council must promote good relations and social intercourse with its members and other persons in the administration of law and justice in the country.

Encik Zaid said the Government would have to seriously consider setting up an alternative legal body that could work with the judiciary if the rift was not settled.

"Lawyers get their practising certificates signed by Tun Hamid and yet they cannot respect him. The situation has reached ridiculous proportions," he said in an interview with the New Straits Times.

"It is time for a review of the three-year motion against Tun Hamid with the aim of having it annulled accordingly. The Bar Council must get its perspective right or risk jeopardising its existence.

"The Bar Council initiated the vote of no-confidence motion against Tun Hamid after the suspension of five Supreme Court judges for their role inactions pursued after the sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President in 1988. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad, in referring to the sacking and the suspensions, had stated he had proof that the Bar Council had been spreading lies abroad on the matter.

To prevent further public acrimony between the judiciary and the Bar Council, Encik Zaid proposed the formation of a Malaysian Law Academy that will promote and maintain high standards of conduct and learning in the legal profession.

The academy should be administered by a senate chaired by the Lord President and its members comprise Supreme Court judges, the Attorney-General, president of the Bar Council and other relevant legal bodies, Deans of law faculties at local universities and others deemed fit to be part of the body.

Meanwhile, Bar Council president Manjeet Singh said Justice Minister Syed Hamid Albar was entitled to his opinion in asking the Bar Council to apologise to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad for allegedly making allegations against the country's judiciary abroad.

No comments: