KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 27 – Opposition stalwart Karpal Singh's success on Wednesday
in getting the support of 57 lawmakers to force a Parliamentary debate on Chief
Justice Tan Sri Zaki Azmi's alleged misconduct is testament to the strength of
the opposition in Parliament.
But the motion has been criticised by some lawyers as being petty and
politically motivated.
"This (debate of misconduct) is all about politics...it is not about the
judiciary, not about cleaning up or rehabilitating the judiciary," said a senior
lawyer requesting anonymity because of legal sensitivities.
"We fear the judiciary will be damaged by this move and not rehabilitated," he
said, adding that Zaki's speech, in which he admits "to bribe each and every
individual," had a context to it that is now missing in the arguments in
Parliament.
"Bribe does not mean use of money. Nor does he say he did it...in fact he denies
it," the lawyer said.
"The context is that Zaki is against it. He is opposed to it and he is cleaning
up and he is warning the court staff against it," the lawyer said, admitting,
however, that the legal fraternity is heavily divided over the issue and how to
respond to it.
The Bar Council, which had supported Zaki's appointment as Chief Justice despite
his background as an Umno lawyer, has not issued a statement on the issue or on
Karpal's campaign.
Karpal's motion calls for a debate on Zaki's alleged misconduct and also that he
be referred to a tribunal appointed by the King to remove him as Chief Justice.
Another senior lawyer said the issue is petty in comparison to the "real and
very serious" misconduct involving former chief justices that was exposed during
the public inquiry into the "V.K. Lingam" video in 2007.
"Zaki is gradually cleaning up the judiciary but now, with this allegation
hanging over him, he might be sidetracked," the lawyer said adding, however,
that MPs like Karpal Singh have a duty as elected officials to the people and it
is the right of Parliament to debate judicial misconduct if enough MPs want it.
"In this case, the required number of MPs have signed up to back a debate," the
lawyer said. "The request must be honoured."
Whatever the judicial view of the case is, politically, it is a significant
victory for the Pakatan Rakyat coalition and showcases its power and strength
before the people and the benefits of "checks and balances."
Karpal managed to get 57 MPs or 25% of the 222 MPs to file the motion under
Standing Order 36(8) and Article 127 of the Federal Constitution to debate the
conduct of the Chief Justice.
"Such a subjective motion requires 14 days notice, so it will be on the order
paper before the house adjourns in December," Karpal told reporters on
Wednesday. "Zaki has refused to step down...so we have to take it further."
Karpal's motion states that the House needed to discuss the conduct of Zaki over
comments made in Kuching on Nov 7 in which he said that, when he was a
practising lawyer in 1987, "it took me six months to be nice, to bribe each and
every individual to get back into their good books before our files were
attended to. That was my personal experience and I am telling this to all the
clerks and all the registries to stop this nonsense."
On Nov 8, the New Straits Times carried a clarification by Zaki saying: "Your
reporter must have misinterpreted what I said, which is, during that period
there was corruption in order to get things done at the court registry, as I
myself have done it. I have never in my life bribed or received any bribe."
THREE BLIND MICE? written by Stephen Tan Ban Cheng,
Thursday, November 27 2008 09:15 pm
The issue is about corruption and lying allegedly committed by the Chief Justice, the highest official on and the leader of the Bench.
Interestingly, Baradan the journalist have quoted two unnamed "senior lawyers" in an attempt to give both sides of the picture.
At first glance, I am inclined to feel that the story has been slanted against the Opposition. For instance, how does the "senior lawyer" form the view that it is all about politics, and not about judiical reform. For all we know, both aspects may be ventilated.
Anyway, this is the first time in the history of the Malaysian Parliament that a "substantive motion" - not the "subjective motion" (I hope it is just a typographical error and not a strategic misrepresentation" since it is just too early in the piece to do that) - has been filed.
Let us see how the Government responds to this Opposition initiative. Let us hope that it will not respond like the three blind mice!
Stephen Tan Ban Cheng
Senior lawyer remains anonymous on this written by Sithananda Prasad a/l Deva Prasad,
Friday, November 28 2008 10:28 am
Can these seniors just reveal who they are? Whats so sensitive about that when so many others post comments here with their identity being revealed here!!!!! any way bottom line whats is of much importance here is the authenticity of the allegations made...
VK's issue was serious? !!! You must be joking !!!! So is the senior lawyer trying to say that the allegations raised against the CJ who is to be the highest rep of the judiciary is petty? Give us a break learned senior !!!! Am sure you can do better than that.
Sithananda Prasad a/l Deva Prasad
Anonymity from a Senior Lawyer? written by Fahri Azzat,
Friday, November 28 2008 04:58 pm
Who is this senior lawyer who hasn't got the courage to reveal his name? If he is unwilling to standby what he says and face its consequences he should shut up and crawl back into whichever hole s/he came from. These are the senior lawyers who are all swagger and talk but no action. And please lah, there's no such things as 'legal sensitivities'. Since when was there a legal or illegal sensitivity. It is for this reason I pay scant attention to one's seniority where courage, intelligence and honesty is concerned. You can be senior and still be a joke like this one.
Fahri Azzat
Well said Fahri! written by Visvanathan Murugiah,
Saturday, November 29 2008 11:09 am
Fahri you couldnt have put it better! Thank you.
Visvanathan Murugiah
Zaki needs to sort out his grammar! written by Manjeet Singh Dhillon,
Saturday, November 29 2008 05:24 pm
This is what Zaki is reported to have said: "it took me six months to be nice, to bribe each and every individual to get back into their good books before our files were attended to. That was my personal experience and I am telling this to all the clerks and all the registries to stop this nonsense."
This is what Zaki claims in his clarification to have said: "Your reporter must have misinterpreted what I said, which is, during that period there was corruption in order to get things done at the court registry, as I myself have done it. I have never in my life bribed or received any bribe." [The emphasis is added.]
'A I have myself done it.' Done what? A little earlier he was talking about corruption in the judiciary and about resorting to it to get things done. A plain reading of the clarification suggests that Zaki did it too! The clarification is as bad as the first statement.
Feet are for walking on not for putting into one's mouth. Either Zaki needs to attend an English primer and get his grammar sorted out or he was, for want of a better expression, 'hoist on his own petard'. Let Karpal get on with things.
Baradan's 'senior' lawyers? Anonymous remarks and comments should be given short shrift. Fahri is right. Own up or shut up!
Manjeet Singh Dhillon
Write comment
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
2012 Hotel Corporate Rates Attending seminars? Going for a holiday? Click on the link above to check out the list of hotel corporate rates for Members of the Bar, which is updated regularly.
Talk on Intellectual Property Law (10 Feb 2012) Organised by the Selangor Bar Committee, the talk on “Intellectual Property Law” will take place at 5:00 pm, at the Selangor Bar Committee Auditorium, on 10 Feb 2012 (Friday). The talk will feature Bahari Yeow Tien Hong. Click on the link above for more details.
Seminar on the Fundamentals of Bankruptcy Proceedings (21 Feb 2012) Organised by the Kuala Lumpur Bar Professional Development Committee, the seminar on “The Fundamentals of Bankruptcy Proceedings”, featuring Sanjeev Kumar Rasiah, will take place at 3:00 pm, at the Kuala Lumpur Bar Auditorium, on 21 Feb 2012 (Tuesday). Click on the link above for more details.
Seminar on the Fundamentals of Conveyancing (24 Feb 2012) Organised by the Kuala Lumpur Bar Professional Development Committee, this seminar featuring Jeremiah R Gurusamy will take place at 3:00 pm, at the Kuala Lumpur Bar Auditorium, on 24 Feb 2012 (Friday). Click on the link above for more details.
Mediation Skills Training Course (29 Feb to 4 Mar 2012) Organised by Bar Council, the Mediation Skills Training Course will take place at 8:30 am to 5:30 pm, at Raja Aziz Addruse Auditorium, Bar Council, on 29 Feb to 4 Mar 2012 (Wednesday to Sunday). Deadline for registration and payment is 17 Feb 2012 (Friday). Click on the link above for more details.
Talk on “Land Fraud: An Australian Perspective” (13 Mar 2012) Organised by IGIL, GSGSG and UUM COLGIS, this free talk featuring Quintin George Rozario of Delta Law, Brisbane, Australia, will take place at 9:00 am, at Dewan Seminar A, Pusat Konvensyen, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, on 13 Mar 2012 (Tuesday). To RSVP, contact Mr Abutt (04-928 4397; abutt@uum.edu.my).
News/Articles/Notices 
©
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 021/2012: Application to State Authority for Consent to Transfer Properties
The issue is about corruption and lying allegedly committed by the Chief Justice, the highest official on and the leader of the Bench.
Interestingly, Baradan the journalist have quoted two unnamed "senior lawyers" in an attempt to give both sides of the picture.
At first glance, I am inclined to feel that the story has been slanted against the Opposition. For instance, how does the "senior lawyer" form the view that it is all about politics, and not about judiical reform. For all we know, both aspects may be ventilated.
Anyway, this is the first time in the history of the Malaysian Parliament that a "substantive motion" - not the "subjective motion" (I hope it is just a typographical error and not a strategic misrepresentation" since it is just too early in the piece to do that) - has been filed.
Let us see how the Government responds to this Opposition initiative. Let us hope that it will not respond like the three blind mice!
Stephen Tan Ban Cheng