|
©Malaysiakini (Used by permission)
by Soon Li Tsin
Royal commission member Mahadev Shankar today refused to recuse himself from the
inquiry, charging that the application made to seek his recusal was attempted to
scuttle the hearing into the Lingam tape.
He said that he was shocked by the nature of the allegations made against him in
the application seeking his recusal.
"I was shocked by the application and categorically dispute it. I decline to
recuse myself," he said this morning when the inquiry resumed after a two-day
break.
On Wednesday, lawyer Hazman Ahmad, who is representing former chief justice Mohd
Eusoff Chin, one of the key witnesses in the inquiry, made a written
application, citing Mahadev’s ‘relationship’ with lawyer VK Lingam as the
grounds for the application.
Today the grounds were disclosed to the commission - that Lingam had arranged
for eye specialist, Dr Albert Owen Edwards from the Mayo clinic in the US to fly
in from Bangkok to treat Mahadev’s eye condition.
Lingam is also said to have foot the bill for the accommodation of the
specialist and his family here in Kuala Lumpur.
"This is all false. All my medical expenses for my eye disorder were paid by the
government," said Mahadev.
"The medical records will prove this," he added.
He said that the application seeking his recusal was an "attempt to scandalise
and scuttle the proceedings".
The commissioner said that in late June last year, he recovered sufficiently.
However, he said he was only required to undergo outpatient treatment at the
hospital.
To prove that his eyesight was alright, Mahadev pointed to and called out the
names of all the lawyers seated on the first, second and third rows of the
counsel's bench.
Mahadev even identified certain people seated on the first and last rows of the
public gallery. This drew laughter from those present in the courtroom.
No contact with Lingam
Eusoff's recusal application was only supported by an affidavit from Lingam.
Based on this Mahadev said Hazman failed to acquire affidavits from other named
individuals such a Dr Joseph Eravelly who assisted Edwards during his trip here.
Meanwhile, in Eravelly’s statutory declaration, he denied asking Lingam to foot
Edwards’ holiday bill but merely assisted in organising parts of the tours and a
lecture scheduled in a local university.
Mahadev also denied that he had any contact with Lingam save for meeting him
briefly before the lecture when Edwards observed Mahadev’s eye condition.
"Edwards was taking an interest in local medical procedures being implemented by
Selayang Hospital on their patients (which included me) with a view of
incorporating this information into his lecture.
"The allegations (by Lingam) that I thanked him and told him I was very grateful
and indebted to him is an outright fabrication and totally untrue," he said.
Lingam’s lawyer R Thayalan then made an oral application to the commission on
the grounds that his client be given time to rebut the ‘disparaging’ remarks
made against him by Mahadev.
Mahadev proceeded to quiz him how should he answer to ‘vicious’ accusations
levied by Lingam himself.
Robert Lazar - who was acting for the Malaysian Bar - defended the
commissioner’s move and said Lingam was the ‘author of this own misfortune’ for
raising matters that could be challenged.
The application was subsequently rejected.
Khoo: Highly presumptuous
Similarly, another application seeking to disqualify commission member Prof Dr
Khoo Kay Kim was also rejected by the commission today.
Lingam had on Wednesday made the application citing that there could be a
conflict of interest if Khoo sat in the commission to hear and decide on
evidence tendered by lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah as they were both
commission members of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam).
However, Khoo disputed this nexus today, saying that he had "little interaction"
with Shafee in Suhakam despite sitting on the human right commission’s editorial
board.
Meanwhile, Khoo said the reasons advanced requesting him to recuse himself from
further hearing the proceedings were more conjectural than real.
He said the claim that he and Shafee frequently met was untrue and it was highly
presumptuous to suggest that because Shafee and he were members of Suhakam, he
must unavoidably support Shafee’s views.
"I belong to the boring corridors of an academic institution and he functions in
the vibrant atmosphere of the mahkamah (courts).
"It may not be east is east and west is west, certainly seldom do the ‘twain
shall meet," he said.
The commission ended to today at 6.30pm. They are due to submit a report to the
King on March 11.
 |
News 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 231/2010: 2nd Asia Pacific Regional Forum Conference
