|
 •
My son took video clip of Lingam
©Malaysiakini
(Used by permission)
by K Kabilan & Steven Gan
• Q&A: My son took the Lingam tape
• Video-clip man worries about his safety
Businessman Loh Mui Fah today disclosed that it was his son who had recorded the
Lingam tape, finally putting to rest the question of the controversial clip’s
authenticity.
The grainy 14-minute clip, made public last September, depicted lawyer VK Lingam
having a phone conversation on the appointment of friendly judges with ex-chief
justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim.
However, Loh was quick to point out that he did not release the video clip to
PKR, the opposition party which exposed the controversial clip.
“It could have been my son, or my lawyers or any of my staff,” he told
Malaysiakini in an exclusive interview at a secret location in Kuala Lumpur
tonight.
“The phone conversation took place in late December 2001,” said the 58-year-old
businessman, who also claimed that he was going public now because he fears for
his life.
Loh said that he and his son were at Lingam’s house for dinner and when he asked
the lawyer who it was that he was talking to on the phone and Lingam said it was
Ahmad Fairuz.
Malaysiakini met Loh at his lawyer’s 9th floor posh apartment in an
upmarket residency in the city.
Wearing a light blue collarless shirt with a black jacket and a pair of shades,
Loh said that he was not aware that his son, Jwo Burne, 27, had made the
recording.
“My son had a powerful camera which had recording facilities. He was taking
photographs of Lingam, his house, his dog and all. I was not even aware that he
had recorded Lingam’s phone conversation,” said Loh, who was coy about his
business ventures apart from saying that it involved IT and forestry.
He said that he was only aware of the existence of the video clip after it was
released to the public by PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim.
The clip, said Loh, was made on Dec 21, 2001 when both father and son visited
Lingam to discuss a legal matter.
Recorded with high-end camera
He said that he had known Lingam from the mid-90s and had sought legal advice
from the lawyer every now and then.
“But he was always busy, having no time to attend to our matter. So he invited
us for dinner to his house so that we can discuss our matter,” he said, without
disclosing what legal issues they were to discuss.
Sipping a glass of red wine, Loh said that he was at Lingam’s house from 7pm to
11pm that day, adding that even then the lawyer was constantly on the telephone.
“He had so many incoming calls. And then, there was this phone call... my son
was taking photographs and when Lingam ended the call, I asked him who it was,
to which he said ‘Ahmad Fairuz’,” said Loh.
“My son and I had no idea that he was talking to Ahmad Fairuz. My son had no
intention or knowledge of whom he was talking to. Only at the end of the call,
when I asked, we knew it was Ahmad Fairuz.”
He said that he was “not pleased” when he discovered that his son had recorded
the phone call. He was also similarly “not pleased to see it released publicly”.
“I don’t know who released it to PKR. I didn’t give it to them, I also did not
consent for it to be released,” he said.
His entire interview with Malaysiakini was also recorded by a member of
his staff using a camera.
When pressed further if he knew who released the video clip, Loh merely said
that it could be anyone - from his son to a member of his staff.
“It is best for my son to answer as to why he taped it and if he released the
video clip,” he said, adding that Jwo Burne was however currently working in
Shanghai, China.
“No, I didn’t ask him if he released the tape...,” said Loh.
Willing to testify
Loh added that Jwo Burne, the eldest of three boys, was willing to come and
testify at the royal commission which will kick off its inquiry into the Lingam
tape on Monday.
‘But he must be duly informed and given sufficient notice,” he said in the
interview which lasted for about 70 minutes.
Loh himself is also willing to appear before the royal commission to confirm
that the conversation which Lingam had on the telephone did take place.
“I can confirm that, but I have no way of ascertaining that it was Ahmad Fairuz
at the other end. I have only what Lingam told me,” he said.
However, he said he had yet to be called to appear before the commission.
Loh also said that he was approached by PKR seeking his support for the video
clip but revealed that he was not eager to help them.
“I was reluctant. I didn’t agree with it. Also why get involved in it. I told
them to leave me alone,” he said.
He also added that PKR did not tell him of how and through whom they got the
video clip.
Loh further said that after the recording was made public, Lingam had written to
him, seeking a meeting.
“I disagreed to go to his office. Apart from the letters, I have not spoken to
him at all,” he said.
The Lingam tape sparked a public uproar and called into question the integrity
of the judiciary. The government in December formed a five-member royal
commission to probe into the matter.
When the phone conversation took place, Ahmad Fairuz was the Chief Judge of
Malaya, the judiciary No 3 post. He recently retired as the country’s top judge.
Q&A: My son took the Lingam tape
by Steven Gan & K Kabilan
Businessman Loh Mui Fah today spoke to Malaysiakini on
his and his son’s role in the controversial Lingam tape.
Malaysiakini: How did you become involved in the Lingam tape?
Loh Mui Fah: You can see that the video was taken a number of years back.
The speculation was quite right, it was in 2002 (that the video clip was
recorded) but in fact it was at the end of December 2001. During the time, we
have had engagement with (lawyer) VK Lingam on legal matters.
So he was your lawyer?
Yes, he was my lawyer. I know VK Lingam for quite a number of years. You can
consider it quite normal that I was invited to have dinner in his house.
(Your relationship with Lingam) went back how many years?
Probably around the mid-90s.
He has been your lawyer from the mid-90s?
I wouldn’t say he was my lawyer but he had given me legal advice. And one of the
reasons that I was invited (to Lingam’s house for dinner), I think you can
consider that he knew me for quite some time. Probably one of the more important
reason is that despite that he was representing us legally, we feel that he was
not doing enough as our lawyer in our cases. All the time, (there was) not
sufficient time given attending to our cases.
Sorry to say that he was probably too busy, probably (there were other) more
important things to do. We felt that, probably he felt it as well, that there
wasn’t sufficient time given to us attending to our issues. So he said ‘why not
come to my house in the evening, nobody would disturb (us) so that I can at
least give you more time and discuss your matters’.
What kind of businesses are you involved in?
I am involved in IT (information technology) and the forestry sector, and
overseas projects. I’ve been in the business circle for quite a while and if a
BN leader were to ask me, I will say I’m more familiar with the BN leaders than
any of the opposition leaders.
So you see yourself closer to BN leaders?
At least, I know some of them very well.
So you were invited to this dinner by VK Lingam?
Yes, so we went along.
When you said ‘we’ went along, who does that include? your father? your son?
No, my son was following me.
Tell us exactly what happened that night when you arrived at his house for
dinner?
We were offered drinks, not alcohol. Some other people were supposed to join us
but it turned out to be only him. Of course, in the process VK Lingam’s sister
came along. Our intention of discussing our matters were interrupted by his
sister (who is also a lawyer) coming in, talking about their own legal issues.
So if they were talking, I was only listening.
After that, the sister left. We had dinner. After dinner, we sat down, supposed
to have a relaxed evening to discuss our issues. Then all the calls came,
incoming calls.
And he was using the same phone?
No, he was using different phones. He had many phones.
These were all handphones?
Different handphones. He hardly used a fixed line phone. I think he has so many
prepaid phones.
And this particular controversial phone call (which was recorded) - what
happened?
I think there were more (phone calls). Just like his sister consulting him on
certain legal issues. We spent the whole night in his house.
This was from what time to what time?
I would say not later than 7pm until not earlier than 11pm.
Regarding the phone call?
I think probably the one who took the video was not aware (that Lingam was
talking to then Chief Judge of Malaya Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Halim). You see,
during the end part, I asked him (who was the person he was talking to). At that
very (moment), there was no knowledge who it was (on the other end of the line).
That’s why after the call, I asked (him) the question (who it was). If I did not
ask the question, probably this thing would not be answered. I do know why I
asked the question.
Your question was who was that person?
Yes, who was that person. I think the rest could be seen by yourself.
Was your son took the video?
Yes, it was my son.
He knew that he was taking the video or was it by accident?
I think this would be best answered by him...
But you were there as well...
Everybody (at the dinner) was aware that he (Loh’s son) was taking photographs
of us.
Tell us how the video was taken?
On this part, I do not know. During this time, I was not even aware that the
video was on recording us. Honestly, I wasn’t aware. If I were aware, I’d
behaved a little better. I wouldn’t even asked the question.
When did you become aware of the video?
I was aware of it after it was released. I can tell I was not pleased to see
this thing surfacing publicly. I was not the one who gave, neither have I
consented the video to be released. In fact, I wasn’t even aware that was such
video clip.
How did your son managed to record that clip?
The best person would be my son to answer the question. Of course, after all
these things, when I enquire - it was quite a powerful camera at that time as I
discovered now. The camera was very advanced. It had 5 megapixels. Five
megapixels in 2001 was tremendous even by today’s standards.
So it was a photo camera with video capacity?
It must be.
Where is your son now?
He is China-based.
When did you see (the video clip)?
It must be a few weeks later (after it was made public)
And what was your reaction?
I was quite unhappy that I was involved in a controversial issue. I’m being put
into a very difficult situation.
You have written to the (government-appointed) panel of inquiry?
Yeah.
By email?
There was an address they gave. They gave the public (and asked them to) contact
this address, then I contacted that address. I have double ascertained the whole
issue by writing to the prime minister.
I could also see during the time there were debates - oh, witnesses please come
forward. All the security would be assured. It is only natural that I want to be
assured that I am given the due protection, whatever security the government
thinks fit.
And you wrote to the prime minister asking for that (protection). What
response did you get from the prime minister?
[Long pause] Just like now I’m responding to you.
No response.
[Nodded]
There was one occasion where you said you were stopped by the ACA officers.
It was an intrusion of my privacy. We were quite cautious how all the time we
had been following, trailing by people. Very uncomfortable.
Of course, having said that, we received threatening phone calls. I wouldn’t
want to speculate because they (the callers) never identified (themselves).
What did they say?
They were talking about asking me to watch out for my life. ‘We can finish you.’
By ‘finish’, means what? I received those kinds of calls. Again as I told the
police, I received these things. They said, ‘how do you prove (that the calls
were made)? where do you find these people?’ I should be putting this back to
the police.
How many police reports did you lodge?
I must have lodged at least a report.
Video-clip man worries about his safety
K Kabilan & Steven Gan
Businessman Loh Mui Fah, 58, today claimed that he was worried for his personal
safety over his role in the Lingam tape scandal.
In an exclusive interview with Malaysiakini today, Loh admitted that his
son, Jwo Burne, had recorded lawyer VK Lingam’s telephone conversation with
former chief justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim on the night of Dec 20,
2001.
Loh added he and his son had went to Lingam’s house for dinner and to consult
him on some legal matters.
Explaining further the harassments he had faced since the grainy 14-minute video
clip was made public by opposition party PKR last year, Loh said that officers
from the Anti-Corruption Agency had been tailing him day and night.
ACA officers had once intercepted him while he was on his way to Singapore, and
also visited his office and home simultaneously where they threatened to ‘take
away’ Loh’s youngest son.
“I have also received threatening telephone calls... asking me to watch out and
that they will finish me,” said the businessman, who was also coy on his
business venture apart from saying that it involved IT and forestry.
Loh said that he had written to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on Nov 5,
saying that he was willing to assist in the investigations into the Lingam tape
should there be an assurance that “his safety would be guaranteed”. [see letter
below]
“But nothing happened. I have had no reply from the prime minister,” he
lamented.
Loh added that he had also emailed the three-member panel formed by the
government to look into the authenticity of the Lingam tape, offering to assist
in their probe. Again, he added, he had not heard from them.
Tailed day and night
Last month, the ACA ‘harassment’ and threatening phone calls became so
unbearable and that Loh said he lodged at least one police report.
“The intrusion into my private life was bad,” he told Malaysiakini when
met at his lawyer’s plush apartment in the heart of the city.
“They hunted me day and night. They came in cars, waited for me with engines
running, waiting until midnight. The security guards at my apartment can vouch
for this,” he said.
“Once the ACA visited my house and my office at the same time. When they found
that I wasn’t there, they harassed my youngest son and threatened to take him
away,” he said.
Loh said that once while he was travelling by car to Singapore, he was
intercepted in Malacca by two ACA officers.
“They wanted me to immediately return with them to their headquarters in
Putrajaya to take a statement from me. I told them I will not follow them and
got them to let me talk to their superior,” he said.
“I told them I can cooperate but it must be properly done, and that I am given
proper notice,” he added.
According to Loh, he did not know how the ACA knew that he was involved in the
matter.
“Maybe Lingam had told them that I and my son were at his house on that day,” he
speculated.
Plan to catch him unprepared
Loh suggested that the agency was perhaps badgering him to give a statement as
they wanted to catch him unprepared instead of having him come with a prepared
statement.
The businessman said that he feared for his life. “That is why I am going public
now,” he said.
“I wrote to the PM seeking protection but I didn’t receive any assurance from
him. Do I fear for my life? I won’t take anything for granted,” he said.
“Going public is the best option that I have.”
Loh also said that he was willing to appear before the royal commission which
will kick off its inquiry on Monday to probe the Lingam tape.
“I will go before them in the interest of the public, but it is up to them to
find their own answer,” he added.
The royal commission, formed after the panel tasked to probe the clip’s
authenticity ended up empty-handed, is to further investigate the matter.
 |
News 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Bar Council's Observation Report to SUHAKAM’s Inquiry into the Bandar Mahkota Cheras Incident
