©New
Straits Times (Used by permission)
by Anis Ibrahim
KUALA LUMPUR: If judicial appointments are kept secret by those in the Prime
Minister's Department, how did a lawyer come to know about them?
This question was posed by Datuk Mahadev Shankar, a member of
the Royal Commission of Inquiry at its hearing yesterday.
Former chief secretary to the government Tan Sri Samsudin Osman had testified
earlier that former chief justice Tun Dzaiddin Abdullah had received a letter
dated Dec 5, 2001 approving the nomination of three individuals as High Court
judges.
"The three were secretary–general Datuk Heliliah Mohd Yusof, judicial
commissioners Datuk Ramly Ali and Datuk Ahmad Maarop, while two lawyers who had
also been recommended, Dr Andrew Peng Hui and Zainuddin Ismail, were rejected,"
he said, replying to inquiry officer Datuk Nordin Hassan.
Yesterday was day three of the hearing into the 14–minute clip featuring
prominent lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam allegedly discussing judicial appointments
with former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim.
Mahadev pointed out that only those privy to the letter,
marked Rahsia (secret), would have known about the two rejections.
Mahadev: Based on the video clip we are concerned with, allegedly recorded on
Dec 20, 2001, it was already known by then that Chew and Zainuddin had been
rejected. How is that possible?
Samsudin: I honestly do not know. As far as I'm concerned, my interaction on
this matter is only with the former prime minister.
Mahadev: But the conversation suggests that the person talking on the phone
possessed confidential information.
Samsudin: We guard our information very closely on the issue of judicial
appointments and promotions. Our security is very tight.
Mahadev: Well, it puzzles me that if security is tight, how can the lawyer on
the phone mention a fact that was confidential?
Samsudin: This is puzzling to me as well.
Mahadev: If he had known this, he might know a lot more. How is that possible?
Samsudin: I cannot speculate. I don't even know this person.
The letter dated Dec 5, 2001 is consistent with assertions that Lingam made in
the 14–minute clip where he is seen mentioning that Chew and Zainuddin had been
rejected.
Samsudin testified that the letter was signed by former prime minister Tun Dr
Mahathir Mohamad in response to Dzaiddin's letter dated Oct 2, 2001 recommending
Heliliah, Ramly, Ahmad, Chew and Zainuddin as High Court judges.
At this point, commission member Tan Sri Steve Shim Lip Kiong asked Samsudin: "Tun
Dzaiddin had recommended five people as judges but Dr Mahathir had only approved
three? Out of curiosity, would you know why the two were rejected?"
"When (Dr Mahathir) made this decision, these names were just dropped," Samsudin
replied.
Shim asked again: "You don't know the reasons?"
"I don't know the reasons, sir. There were none given," Samsudin said.
During Samsudin's testimony, Nordin tendered 30 exhibits comprising letters and
memoranda showing the paper trail of Ahmad Fairuz's various appointments.
The documents include Dzaiddin's letters to Dr Mahathir recommending Ahmad
Fairuz for the posts of chief judge of Malaya and president of the Court of
Appeal, memoranda from the Prime Minister's Office to the Conference of Rulers
and the Keeper of the Rulers' Seal for the purposes of approving the
appointments.
Samsudin also testified that his recommendations had not been influenced by
third parties.
Confusion over name mentioned in video clip
KUALA LUMPUR: Was it James Kumar or James Foong?
The Bar Council maintained that the name allegedly mentioned
by lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam in a videotaped telephone conversation with a former
chief judge of Malaya was Foong, now a Court of Appeal judge.
Anti–Corruption Agency officer Chuah Lay Choo, who said she had used a
high–quality headphone to listen to the conversation in the Lingam video clip,
insisted that it was Kumar.
Lawyer Ranjit Singh, who is appearing for the council, said only Foong could be
aligned to a particular chief justice
"We do not know of James Kumar," he told the commission.
Ranjit said Lingam was talking about the division between Tun
Dzaiddin Abdullah, who was the top judicial officer when the clip was recorded
in Dec 20, 2001, and Tun Eusoff Chin, a former chief justice.
He said the council was raising the accuracy of the name because businessman Loh
Mui Fah had testified in court on Tuesday that he (Loh) had engaged Lingam and
the late Manjit Singh in a civil case.
This matter was before Foong who was then a High Court judge in Ipoh.
"A decision should be made as to the official transcript," Ranjit said.
Commission member Datuk Mahadev Shankar said the five–member panel would listen
to the clip again and make a decision.
ACA officer ordered to get telephone records
by V. Anbalagan
KUALA LUMPUR: An Anti–Corruption Agency officer has been ordered by the Royal
Commission of Inquiry to obtain the telephone records of a lawyer and a retired
judge from telecommunication companies.
The commission's chairman, Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor, told
the officer, Chuah Lay Choo, that the panel would assist her if these companies
refused to co–operate.
"We can summon them to provide the records," he said during the third day of
hearing into the controversial "Lingam video clip" which purportedly shows a
lawyer discussing judicial appointments.
Haidar made the remark following several questions posed by Bar Council
representative Ranjit Singh and lawyer Wee Choo Keong whether Chuah had obtained
itemised billings of mobile phones and fixed line numbers of Datuk V.K. Lingam
and former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim.
Lingam, a lawyer, is alleged to have had a telephone conversation with Ahmad
Fairuz over the appointment of judges.
On Tuesday, businessman Loh Mui Fah told the commission that
Lingam informed him that he was speaking to Ahmad Fairuz on the telephone when
he (Loh) was at the lawyer's house to seek legal advice over dinner. Loh also
said that a 14–minute clip taken by his son was recorded in Lingam's living room
on Dec 20, 2001.
Yesterday, council lawyer Ranjit Singh asked Chuah whether she had tried to
ascertain whether there was a call from Ahmad Fairuz to Lingam.
Chuah said she tried to establish this from the telecommunication companies from
the number used by Lingam and Ahmad Fairuz in 2001 and 2002.
However, she said there was no record of mobile phones registered in Lingam's
name during those years.
Ranjit: Which companies did you check?
Chuah: Maxis, DiGi and Celcom.
Commission member Datuk Mahadev Shanker interjected and asked whether the
companies had the records for 2001 and 2002
Chuah replied that they had records and investigations revealed that Lingam had
used prepaid services.
Ranjit: Did you ask Lingam the mobile number he used during the conversation in
the clip?
Chuah: Lingam told me he used a prepaid line but he could not remember the
number.
Ranjit: Did you conduct similar investigations into the telephone numbers of
Ahmad Fairuz?
Chuah: Yes, I did. He has been using 013 – ... from 2000 until the time I
interviewed him last year. We cannot verify because we do not have Lingam's
number.
Ranjit: Did you also check Ahmad Fairuz's fixed telephone lines?
Chuah: Yes, We had.
Ranjit: Did you then come across phone calls made on Dec 20, 2001?
Chuah: At the time of the investigation, we did not have the date of the
conversation.
Shanker: Is there any record to show calls were made on that day?
Chuah: We have yet to obtain the itemised bills for that number (013–...) from
2001 and 2002. We have applied to Celcom but have not received it.
Ranjit: While we are assuming that Ahmad Fairuz made calls from his mobile
number, it could also be made from fixed lines. Have you ascertained that?
Chuah: I have investigated his fixed line numbers, both at home and office.
Haidar: Did you check?
Chuah: I did not go further because I did not have Lingam's phone number.
Haidar: Did you check Ahmad Fairuz's house and office lines?
Chuah: Yes, I only checked the house line.
Haidar: Did you ask for the telephone bill?
Chuah: Yes, In October or November last year, but have not received it .
Ranjit: Now that you know the date is Dec 20, 2001, would you be able to obtain
the record for that day only?
Chuah: (Silence)
Ranjit: If the telcos refuse to cooperate, the commission can summon them to
come here.
Shankar: You (Chuah) go to the telcos and ask them to give the records. Come
back and tell us.
Chuah: Yes, I will do that. But even if I have the record ( Ahmad Fairuz's), I
will have to get Lingam's number. I want to explain that I did not stress to the
telcos the urgency of the phone records because I did not have the exact date of
the conversation at that time.
Haidar: Go and get the records for December 2001.
To another question by Ranjit, Chuah said she did not establish in the course of
her investigation that there was an election petition where Wee Choo Keong was
involved. Ranjit then supplied a copy of an unreported judgment of Ahmad Fairuz
who was sitting as the election judge.
Shankar then suggested that the copy be given to Chuah for her to study the
document in order to save the commission some time.
Wee also asked Chuah whether she had checked phone records at Mutiara
Telecommunications Sdn Bhd, whose major shareholder was businessman Tan Sri
Vincent Tan.
Haidar ordered Chuah to check Mutiara's records.
When he was confirmed
KUALA LUMPUR: Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim was confirmed as Appeal Court
president on Dec 1, 2002, the Royal Commission of Inquiry heard yesterday.
Former deputy director (personnel) in the Federal Court
registry, Puspa Al Bakri Devadason, said from Nov 24, 2001, Ahmad Fairuz was
standing in for Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Wan Adnan Wan Ismail who was
on medical leave.
"Ahmad Fairuz was assuming Wan Adnan's functions as the latter was sick," she
said when questioned by deputy public prosecutor Datuk Azmi Ariffin.
The seventh witness said Ahmad Fairuz was also the chief judge of Malaya, having
been appointed to the post on Sept 1, 2001.
Wan Adnan passed away on Dec 24, 2001.
On Monday, a transcript of Datuk V.K. Lingam's phone
conversation with Ahmad Fairuz in a video clip was tendered as evidence.
The clip is said to have been recorded at Lingam's house on Dec 20, 2001.
Lingam is alleged to have told Ahmad Fairuz that he would be confirmed as Court
of Appeal president.
The lawyer said he was working very hard to get Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah
appointed chief judge of Malaya. Mohtar, who was appointed to the Federal Court
in 2001, passed away two years later.
Ahmad Fairuz was elevated as chief justice in March 2003 and retired in October
last year.