•
No sarcasm, caustic wit in Dr M's 90–min testimony
©The
Star (Used by permission)
by Chelsea Ng, Cecil Fung and Lisa Goh
• Dr M: I was not influenced
• Long queue as people line up to see Mahathir testify
• Grilling by lawyers tests Tourism Minister’s patience
• Tengku Adnan rubbishes Lingam’s video clip chat
• Anwar volunteers to fill in gaps
• Duo keen to assist
• Lawyers big fans of ‘Lingam’ T–shirt
• Inquiry hot news for Brunei papers
KUALA LUMPUR: Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's much awaited testimony before the V.K. Lingam video clip inquiry yesterday failed to shed much light.
He repeatedly replied “No” or “I do not remember” to various questions posed by
leading officer DPP Datuk Nordin Hassan.
However, Dr Mahathir, the first former prime minister to appear before a Royal
Commission of Inquiry, emphatically denied that he was influenced by anyone on
the appointment of judges.
Before he took the stand, his counsel Tunku Sofiah Jewa told the inquiry that Dr
Mahathir would give his full cooperation.
“Our client wishes us to say that he will answer questions put to him even if in
law from our perspectives as counsel we think the questions are not relevant or
within the scope of the terms of reference of this Royal Commission of Inquiry,”
she added.
Dr M: I was not influenced
KUALA LUMPUR: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad did not know lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam until recently nor was he influenced in the appointment of judges but the former prime minister could not remember the recommendations made by the then Chief Justice Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah on the appointment of judges.
This was revealed when Dr Mahathir testified before the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the V.K. Lingam video clip yesterday.
DPP Datuk Nordin Hassan: For the appointment to all posts except that of the Chief Justice, were you required to consult the Chief Justice?
Dr Mahathir: Yes.
Nordin: Were you bound by the recommendations of the Chief Justice?
Dr Mahathir: No, I was not bound by them.
Nordin: Were you influenced by anyone in deciding the candidate for the post of President of the Court of Appeal?
Dr Mahathir: In giving my consent, I listened to what people said. Although I did not ask for views, in my conversations and social meetings, there were people who talked and I took note but the final decision was my own decision.
Nordin: Were you influenced by anyone in deciding who to nominate for the post of Chief Justice?
Dr Mahathir: Not specifically. But as I've mentioned just now, I have listened to views unofficially during my conversations and when I attended social events. I took note of such views but the final decision was my own.
Dr Mahathir was then referred to two letters.
The first letter was from Dzaiddin to him on a list of five candidates to be considered for appointment as High Court judges, while the second one was Dr Mahathir's reply in which he had agreed to the first three individuals proposed by Dzaiddin.
Dr Mahathir had also asked Dzaiddin to choose another two candidates from an attached list of five other judicial commissioners.
Nordin: Where did you get the names of these other five judicial commissioners?
Dr Mahathir: I might have asked officers who were more familiar with them and from what I had heard, I suggested that two of them be selected to fill the vacancies.
Nordin referred Dr Mahathir to two other letters; the first from Dzaiddin to him and the second, his reply to the then Chief Justice.
Dzaiddin had in his letter chosen Datuk Sulaiman Daud and Datuk V.T. Singam.
He also asked Dr Mahathir to reconsider the candidacy of lawyers Dr Andrew Chew and Zainudin Ismail, whom he had originally proposed but was dropped by the then Prime Minister.
In his reply, Dr Mahathir only agreed to the candidacy of Sulaiman and Singam but rejected that of the two lawyers.
Nordin: Can you briefly explain the reason you made the rejection?
Dr Mahathir: I don't remember.
Nordin then referred Dr Mahathir to the transcript of the video clip at the centre of the controversy and explained the nature of the transcript to the former prime minister.
Nordin: Have you seen the video clip from which this transcript was made?
Dr Mahathir: I saw it on television.
Nordin: Have you received any memorandums from Tun Eusoff Chin or Datuk V.K. Lingam on the appointment of High Court judges?
Dr Mahathir: I don't remember receiving any memorandums from V.K. Lingam but in the course of my duties as Prime Minister, I might have received letters from Tun Eusoff. However, I do not remember.
Nordin: Was the reason you dropped Dr Andrew Chew and Zainudin Ismail's names from the list of candidates for appointment to become High Court judges because Zainudin had opposed the appointment of Tun Ahmad Fairuz as Chief Judge of Malaya as well as that of Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah?
Dr Mahathir: I wasn't aware that there were any disputes about the appointments of these judges.
Nordin then read the following portion from the transcript:
“And then ... ah ... Tan Sri Dzaiddin said he is going to recommend for six people for ... Court of Appeal ... but until today the letter hasn't come to PM. He never discussed, but neither has he sent the letter to PM. He has not sent.
“So, I know, you know, under the Constitution for judges all is ... is for your job lah ... Dato to send, but we don't want to make it an issue now ... A tough time hah? Ah, so ok. Actually, I told Tengku Adnan to inform PM, PM to call you for a meeting. But I ... I will organise this so that Tengku Adnan will call you directly ... and then I got your number. I will tell him to call you directly to arrange for you to meet PM lah.”
Nordin: Had Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor ever arranged any meetings between you and Tun Ahmad Fairuz on the appointment of judges?
Dr Mahathir: No.
Nordin read the following portion from the transcript:
“You see he has now asked for six Court of Appeal judges, so that he can put his men before he retire ... Correct, correct, correct, correct ... Ah ... and then? Ah, ah ... correct, correct, correct, correct ... Ah, but never mind, I will do this ... I will get the ... Tengku Adnan to arrange for PM to call you and Tan Sri Vincent Tan ... for PM to call.”
Nordin: Have you ever called Tun Ahmad Fairuz or Tan Sri Vincent Tan regarding the appointment of six Court of Appeal judges?
Dr Mahathir: As far as I can remember, no.
Nordin then read the following portion from the transcript:
“One day, I went to Vincent Tan's house, I fired him at night in the house. I said bloody hell if you don't do this, who will do it? All these people, Tun Eusoff Chin, Datuk Ahmad Fairuz, Tan Sri Zainon all fought for us.
“Then he called Tengku Adnan. He said, saya bukan Perdana Menteri Malaysia lah, you know, if the old man don't want to listen to me, go to hell. He quarrelled with me.
“I said, never mind, never mind, you don't Tan Sri, you talk to PM again tomorrow morning put Datuk Ahmad Fairuz as CJM. So next day morning he went and he called me back nine thirty, he said the PM already agree.”
Nordin: Has Tan Sri Vincent Tan ever called you to suggest that Tun Ahmad Fairuz be made Chief Judge of Malaya?
Dr Mahathir: No (shakes head).
Nordin read the following from the transcript:
“But you know the old man, at 76 years old, he gets whispers from everywhere and then you don't whisper, he ... he get ... aa ... aa taken away by the other side. But now the PM is very alert because every time he gets letters from Tan Sri Dzaiddin ... he calls Tengku Adnan, he said discuss with Vincent, come and discuss and ...”
(Dr Mahathir smiled when Nordin read the part that said, “he gets whispers from everywhere”. Nordin also said dengan izin each time before reading the words “the old man”)
Nordin: When you got a letter from Dzaiddin, did you call Tengku Adnan and tell him to discuss with Tan?
Dr Mahathir: No (smiling).
Nordin: Had Datuk V.K. Lingam, Tan Sri Vincent Tan and Tengku Adnan ever come to see you regarding Dzaiddin's proposal for Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad to be made Chief Judge of Malaya?
Dr Mahathir: No.
Nordin: Was it true that Tan Sri Abdul Malek's candidacy was rejected because he was “anti–PM”?
Dr Mahathir: He was rejected but that was not the reason.
Wong Chong Wah, counsel for Dzaiddin, then stood up to pose questions to Dr Mahathir.
Wong: Do you recall that before Tun Ahmad Fairuz was recommended as Chief Judge of Malaya, Tun Dzaiddin had recommended Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad to fill that post? Can you recall that?
Dr Mahathir: I don't remember precisely but there were a lot of talk. I did hear talk about Tan Sri Malek being recommended but I listened to a lot of people.
Wong then referred Dr Mahathir to a letter from Dzaiddin on the appointment of Ahmad Fairuz as President of the Court of Appeal.
Wong pointed out that Dzaiddin had recommended Abdul Malek to fill the post of Chief Judge of Malaya once Ahmad Fairuz vacated it.
Dzaiddin had also given an alternative candidate for the post of Chief Judge of Malaya in the event that the Prime Minister still did not agree to appoint Abdul Malek. The alternative candidate was Tan Sri Siti Norma Yaacob.
Dr Mahathir: I don't remember whether I had agreed or not. This was a letter from Dzaiddin and I would have read it. But I don't remember agreeing or disagreeing with Tan Sri Malek's candidacy.
He also said he did not have a copy of a letter dated June 25, 2001 addressed to Dzaiddin over Abdul Malek's candidacy.
Wong: Would you remember what this (June 25) letter talked about?
Dr Mahathir: I can't remember.
M. Puravalen, counsel for Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and two others, then stood up to ask Dr Mahathir about an alleged meeting with former Bank Negara assistant governor Datuk Abdul Murad Khalid in August 1999 around 10pm one night at the Palace of the Golden Horses.
When the panel asked what was the relevance of this meeting, Puravalen claimed that this meeting led to another one with Tan, Tengku Adnan and Lingam and subsequently after that, a press conference was held in which Abdul Murad said he was the “secret banker” of Anwar.
(On Sept 28, 1999, Abdul Murad alleged that over 20 “master accounts'' worth RM3bil had been kept by certain people for Anwar. Claiming he was used by the former deputy prime minister, Murad reportedly admitted that he was personally involved in managing some RM120mil.)
Commission chairman Haidar again asked Puravalen to explain further about his line of questioning, to which the latter said that the matter involved people mentioned in the video clip and practices of corruption.
“I'm referring to events that affected the administration of justice,” the lawyer replied.
Dr Mahathir said he met a lot of people in many places but did not remember meeting Murad.
After that, Christopher Leong, counsel for the Malaysian Bar, began asking Dr Mahathir questions pertaining to Tengku Adnan and whether he had access to the classified correspondence on the appointment of judges in his capacity as Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department in charge of law from January 2001 to November 2002.
Leong: Would Tengku Adnan have access to these documents?
Dr Mahathir: I'm not very sure but normally other ministers or people not concerned, they have no access to them.
When Haidar asked Leong to be more direct, the lawyer asked Dr Mahathir whether Tengku Adnan had access to the 30 letters which had been tendered to the commission as exhibits.
Dr Mahathir: These documents marked rahsia (official secrets) were handled not just by me. My typist, my secretary and other officers would have handled them.
Leong: Do you know Tan Sri Vincent Tan?
Dr Mahathir: Yes, I do. I've had a relationship with him for many years. I know him very well. I ride at his place. We are friends.
Leong: In respect of Datuk V.K. Lingam?
Dr Mahathir: I've read about him being involved in another case. I only got to know him recently in the case of Anwar suing me for defamation.
Leong: How did you come to engage him as a lawyer?
Dr Mahathir: I read about him, I read he had won several cases and I thought it would be good to engage him.
Leong: Were you introduced by Tan Sri Vincent Tan?
Dr Mahathir: I wouldn't be able to say precisely but in order to contact Datuk V.K. Lingam I probably spoke to Tan Sri Vincent Tan.
Leong: Tan Sri Vincent Tan had on several occasions brought Datuk V.K. Lingam to your house?
Dr Mahathir: That's not true.
Leong: He has not been to your house?
Dr Mahathir: After I engaged him, he's been to my house. That was after all these events.
Leong: Is he still currently your lawyer?
Dr Mahathir: Yes, he is still.
Leong then referred Dr Mahathir to the portion of the transcript regarding the appointment of High Court judges where two proposed lawyers' names were dropped and compared it with the correspondence with Dzaiddin on the matter.
Leong: The person speaking in the transcript is speaking of official secrets. Would you know how the speaker got the information?
Dr Mahathir: I wouldn't be able to say. It is privy.
Leong: Did Dzaiddin make recommendations for six people for appointment to the Court of Appeal then?
Dr Mahathir: I can't remember. I don't know the contents of the letter.
Leong: On June 8, 2002, six persons were indeed appointed to the Court of Appeal. The process of appointment or confirmation takes about three to four months, correct? It appears that the person (in the video) seems to have information that should only be privy to yourself and the Chief Justice.
Dr Mahathir: It is privy.
Leong: I presume you don't know how he came to know about it?
Dr Mahathir: No.
Leong also posed several questions to Dr Mahathir in an attempt to clear the air as to whether Dzaiddin had nominated Abdul Malek for the Chief Judge of Malaya post when it was vacated to which the former prime minister said that it could be so.
Leong: Could you inform us the reason for not agreeing to the nomination of Tan Sri Malek as Chief Judge of Malaya?
Dr Mahathir: After listening and hearing what people said, I formed my own conclusion. I then made a decision. Why I made the decision at that time, of course, is not something I tell people because it's my prerogative to decide. I don't have to tell people.
Leong: You would have come up with your own candidate. Would you be able to tell us how you come up with your own candidate?
Dr Mahathir: Usually if I wanted to propose, I'd ask those familiar with these things, including civil servants. Then I would make the proposal.
Leong: We have a situation there, the Chief Justice would be most familiar with his fellow brothers, but the position is that Tun had information that another candidate was more suitable. May I ask as to the main source of this information or consultation?
Dr Mahathir: I can't remember precisely. But what was being talked about I take into consideration, I take the view and I make my decision.
Leong: These sources would be sources at random?
Dr Mahathir: They include civil servants, at times if I suspect anything I may ask verbally senior police personnel, ACA. I have to make sure the candidate I choose is the right person.
Leong: Could Tan Sri Vincent Tan be a source?
Dr Mahathir: Could be. There are many officers who are experienced. They could be from A–G's Department, civil service, or people who have retired or those who had known the personalities in question.
Leong: Could you have obtained some of these names from a memorandum from Tun Eusoff Chin?
Dr Mahathir: I can't remember. My dealings with Eusoff is that he would submit a list of judges according to seniority. Whenever he submits, he would send all information of the judges. That's when he was CJ (Chief Justice).
Leong clarified that the memo he was referring to was the one allegedly sent by Eusoff after he had retired.
To this, Dr Mahathir replied that he did not remember a specific memo recommending names and that he had lost contact with Tun Eusoff after he retired as Chief Justice.
Commissioner Datuk Mahadev Shankar: Were your reasons for rejecting Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad discussed with Dzaiddin? He suggested it, you rejected it. Did you discuss it with him?
Dr Mahathir: I normally don't explain to anybody. This is why I made the decision. This is why. I listen to a lot of people and I make my own decision. I don't explain to anybody.
Long queue as people line up to see Mahathir testify
KUALA LUMPUR: It was barely 7.30am but the queue outside the courtroom on Level Three of the Jalan Duta court complex here was already snaking around the pillars.
Members of the public who wanted to follow the proceedings on the fourth day of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the V.K. Lingam video clip found themselves facing a queue of about 40 people which had started at 6.30am.
On the previous three days, there were only about 10 people in line at that time.
By the time the pass counters were open at 8.30am, the line had easily doubled in length.
This did not include another queue for the press, which had some 40 reporters lining up – and all for 39 press passes, 28 passes for lawyers in the watching brief, and 20 public passes.
The reason for the huge turnout was attributed to the fact that former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was scheduled to take the stand at 10am.
“I came specifically today to see our former prime minister in the witness stand. It should be quite interesting,” said a member of the public who declined to be named.
The atmosphere along the corridor outside the courtroom was also somewhat tense, with many on the alert for the odd queue–cutter.
However, many were still disappointed after the limited passes were handed out for the courtroom, which some lawyers had said was “too small for an open inquiry”.
At 9.35am, Dr Mahathir arrived at the basement backdoor of the court complex dressed in a dark grey business suit and a blue necktie.
His daughter Marina entered the courtroom at 9.50am to accompany her father during his turn to testify, and sat in the front row of the public gallery.
He finished testifying at 11.30am and left through the witness exit.
Grilling by lawyers tests Tourism Minister’s patience
KUALA LUMPUR: Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor became somewhat upset when lawyers grilled him during the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the V.K. Lingam video clip.
The former Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, the 10th witness, started out answering the questions
politely but the grilling clearly tested his patience.
Christopher Leong, who represented the Bar Council, had asked why he thought Lingam would “of all names, pick out your name when you hardly know him?”
Tengku Adnan replied: “My name is not only dropped here, not only by V.K. Lingam. People who want to build mosques, seek donations also use my name.
“Masuk jail pun pakai nama saya (those who get hauled to prison also use my name). Be fair to me.”
On his relationship with Lingam, which Tengku Adnan claimed was “extremely limited”, Leong asked: “If your interaction with Lingam is extremely limited, how could you recognise Lingam after watching the video clip on YouTube?”
“Like I said earlier, initially I couldn't recognise him but after watching a little bit more, I could. I have met him before.
“Macam saudara ni, saya akan cam lah (Like you, I can recognise lah),” Tengku Adnan said to laughter from the courtroom.
When Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's lawyer M. Puravalen asked him if business tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan had ever gone to his house in Taman Duta, Tengku Adnan answered “No.”
But he quickly corrected himself by adding: “Maybe during Hari Raya.”
“Malaysians are all muhibbah. Just like Deepavali I go to your house, and Hari Raya, you come to my house,” he said.
Commission member Datuk Mahadev Shankar later said: “The imputations in
the clip is that you breached the Official Secrets Act. Did you take it up with V.K. Lingam?”
“I didn't call him. I didn't even bother,” Tengku Adnan said.
Despite his earlier frustration, Tengku Adnan left the witness stand with a smile.
Tengku Adnan rubbishes Lingam’s video clip chat
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk V.K. Lingam did not know what he was talking about in the video clip and must have been mad or drunk, Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor said.
“I don’t know what he was saying. I believe it’s not true,” said Tengku Adnan, who was a Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department assisting the minister in charge of law in 2001 when the clip was filmed.
“When I saw the (clip on) YouTube, I thought he (Lingam) was mad or drunk. I don’t know what he said. I believe it’s not true,” he said.
“I think he was mabuk (drunk). I don't know who he was talking to anyway.”
The Tourism Minister, said he did not know how Lingam got the information about the appointment of judges, which was an official secret.
He denied that he had provided Lingam with the information, adding that it was classified information to which he had no access.
“I first saw the video clip in Penang during the fasting month after a friend alerted me that it was on (the Internet file–sharing network) YouTube,” he said to questions by leading officer Datuk Azmi Ariffin yesterday.
Azmi: There is an Indian man talking on the phone in the clip. Can you identify him?
Tengku Adnan: When I first looked, the image was not clear but after a while I could see that he was Datuk V.K. Lingam.
The Minister was then shown the 14–minute clip and confirmed it was Lingam using the phone in the clip.
After that he was asked about 11 parts of the video clip where Lingam made allegations attributed to him, all of which he categorically denied.
The following are the parts in the script read out by Azmi to Tengku Adnan and the Minister’s reply.
Azmi: Lingam said: “I told Tengku Adnan yesterday I had a meeting with him ... and he said no problem, he said he is going to make you ... acting or ... aa ... confirm your position as PCA ... working very hard and then get Tan Sri Mokhtar as the CJM lah.” Was he telling the truth?
Tengku Adnan: No.
Azmi: “According to Tengku, I’m going to see him tomorrow, there is a letter sent to ... ah ... CJ ... ah I mean to Tan Sri Dzaiddin that Datuk Heliliah, Datuk Ali ... and Datuk Ramly and Datuk Ma’arop be made judges ... and aa ... he rejected ah ... that Dr Andrew Chew and apa itu Zainuddin Ismail lah because Zainuddin Ismail who condemned your appointment and Tan Sri Mokhtar’s appointment.” Was this true or not?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “I told Tengku Adnan to inform PM, PM to call you for a meeting. But I ... I will organise this so that Tengku Adnan will call you directly ... and then I got your number. I will tell him to call you directly to arrange for you to meet PM lah. Ah so should be okay. Ah. Then ah ... correct, correct, correct, because it is very important that key players must be there.” Was this within your knowledge?
Tengku Adnan: I did not know about it.
Azmi: “Ah but never mind, I will do this ... I will get the ... Tengku Adnan to arrange for PM to call you and Tan Sri Vincent Tan.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “One day, I went to Vincent Tan’s house, I fired him at night in the house. I said bloody hell if you don’t do this, who will do it? All these people, Tun Eusoff Chin, Datuk Ahmad Fairuz, Tan Sri Zainon all fought for us. Then he called Tengku Adnan. I told Tengku Adnan. He said, saya bukan Perdana Menteri Malaysia lah, you know, if the old man don’t want to listen to me, go to hell.” True?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “But now, the PM is very alert because every time he gets letters from Tan Sri Dzaiddin ... he calls Tengku Adnan, he said discuss with Vincent, come and discuss and ... Yes, yes ... yah, correct ... correct ... Ya, but you see although I know PM, but my views ... I am a lawyer in practice, My views are not ... I go through them, I go through them lah.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “Oh but ... don’t worry, we will organise this, and if Tan Sri Vincent ... if Tan Sri Vincent and Tengku Adnan want to meet you privately, they will ... I will get them to ... I will call you. We will organise a private arrangement ... in a very neutral place.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “I am constantly working on this ... I ... Ya, ya don’t worry, don’t worry ah ... We work hard on this, Dato, and then aa ... if Tan Sri Vincent and Tengku want to see you, I will organise in such a ... a confidential place.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “Don’t worry. Dzaiddin recommended Malek ... Malek Ahmad to be Chief Judge of Malaya, but we went aa cut cut cut cut cut. I, Tengku Adnan, Vincent went and saw PM lah. Got him thrown out because he is anti–PM. We put Fairuz in.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: No, when he spoke he must have been drunk.
Azmi: “So, now I am working very hard. So, he agreed to meet Vincent Tan and PM and ah ... what you call ... Tengku Adnan.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: Not true.
Azmi: “He knows ... I am a ... but when PM calls me on Anwar’s case, I can tell him ... He, he will listen. But if I go promote so and so, that means I got interest. So, I don’t do that. I use Vincent and Tengku to go there and I go f*** them up.” True or not?
Tengku Adnan: He never used me to see the (ex) PM.
Anwar volunteers to fill in gaps
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has volunteered to testify on matters that former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad could not recall on or remember during his testimony yesterday.
M. Puravalen, counsel for Anwar, told the Royal Commission: “He (Anwar) said the former prime minister might not be able to recall certain things in the Cabinet because of his age but he is younger and can be of some assistance.”
Puravalen also said that Anwar would like to testify before Wednesday as he would be going abroad. “He is leaving for Hong Kong on that day and would prefer to testify either tomorrow (today) or on Monday,” he said.
Commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor replied that the commission would take note of the request and would make its decision today.
Former chief justice Tun Eusoff Chin, who is the 11th witness, is scheduled to take the witness stand at 10am today.
Duo keen to assist
KUALA LUMPUR: Two mysterious persons, codenamed X and Y, want to assist the inquiry with information on alleged corruption in the judiciary.
Their lawyer M. Puravalen, who is also acting for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, told the Royal Commission the duo were, however, not prepared to give any statement to the Anti–Corruption Agency.
“They want to give their statements direct to the commission. They don’t trust the ACA,” said Puravalen.
The panel then suggested that Puravalen obtain the statements and present them to the commission today. Puravalen said he would have that organised overnight.
Outside the proceedings, Parti Keadilan Rakyat treasurer William Leong hinted that the witnesses were connected to an event which took place in 1999.
This event, he said, had been included in questions posed by Puravalen to former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, who both testified yesterday.
In his question to Tengku Adnan, Puravalen led the minister back to an event which allegedly took place in the minister’s house in 1999.
“There was a meeting in your house in Taman Duta here in 1999 with Tan Sri Vincent Tan and former assistant governor of Bank Negara Datuk Abdul Murad Khalid wherein Abdul Murad was asked to cooperate to produce evidence against Anwar.
“I am putting this in because the participation in the meeting led to corruption in the judiciary, fixing of cases and fixing of appointment of judges,” said Puravalen.
Tengku Adnan refuted that such a discussion had taken place.
The question posed to Dr Mahathir was about an alleged meeting he had with Abdul Murad at 10pm on one night in August 1999 at the Palace of the Golden Horses which led to another one with Tan, Tengku Adnan and lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam.
Puravalen said that subsequently, a press conference was held in which Abdul Murad said he was the “secret banker” of Anwar.
Lawyers big fans of ‘Lingam’ T–shirt
KUALA LUMPUR: Lawyers are grabbing the Lingam was speaking to me! T–shirts.
Patrick Saw, 54, the brains behind the T–shirt, said they were more popular with lawyers especially in places like Bangsar, where he has another shop selling the shirts.
“The clientele in that area are more professional and appreciate the Lingam T–shirt better,” he said, adding the shirts were hand–ainted.
Inquiry hot news for Brunei papers
MIRI: Newspapers in Brunei are giving prominent coverage to the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the V.K. Lingam video clip.
The reason – there are some 35,000 Malaysians based there.
A survey by The Star found that top Brunei newspapers, such as the Borneo Bulletin, Brunei Times and Media Permata, gave major coverage to the commission’s proceedings in Kuala Lumpur.
Major Malaysian dailies sold in Brunei, including The Star, were also experiencing brisk sales.
Most Malaysians living in Brunei work in the oil and gas industry.
A senior Borneo Bulletin reporter said his paper published wire reports as “their angle of coverage was different from that of Malaysian newspapers.”