|
 •
Public urged to
help in controversial lawyer-judge video
•
Panel khas mula
siasat -- Maklumat orang ramai boleh bantu kes klip video peguam-hakim
•
Probe panel: Come
forward for the sake of M'sia
©New
Straits Times (Used by permission)
by Azura Abas
KUALA LUMPUR: The Special Independent Panel investigating the authenticity
of a video clip allegedly detailing a conversation about judicial appointments
has no legal power.
It will depend very much on the civic consciousness and co-operation of members
of the public.
According to panel member Datuk Mahadev Shankar: "We have no legal power. We
have no power to administer an oath. No power to compel witnesses to come to us.
We have no power to commit anybody for contempt.
"We have no immunity under the law either. If we are a public authority or a
commission of inquiry, we will have statutory immunity for what we are doing.
For what we are doing now, the only immunity we have is our conscience, our good
faith and our honesty of purpose to do this as quick as possible."
Mahadev, a former Court of Appeal judge, said this after the first meeting of
the three-man panel chaired by its head, former chief judge of Malaya, Tan Sri
Haidar Mohd Noor. The other member is social activist Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye.
Also present were Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail,
Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Anti-Corruption Agency
director-general Datuk Ahmad Said Hamdan and ACA deputy director-general I Datuk
Abu Kassim Mohamed.
Mahadev said the panel members had been given 30 working days from the date of
their letters of appointment on Sept 27 to complete their investigation and
produce a report for the government.
The panel is tasked with verifying the authenticity of the video clip which
allegedly shows a senior lawyer discussing judicial appointments on the
handphone with a senior judge.
Mahadev said it would function without interference from anyone, including the
government.
He, however, had a request: "Don't throw stones at us until we have finished our
inquiry. I respect the freedom of speech. If you want us to work well, let us do
our work first, the best we can.
"We are going to act within the law. We have to be satisfied that we are acting
within the law and even the auditor-general is very careful to see that the
money is used wisely to finance this investigation."
Since the panel had no power to force anyone to do anything, Mahadev said those
who had knowledge or information about the authenticity of the video clip would
have to be bold enough to come forward.
"The truth is the best armour. Justice is the best protection. But you can't
pick that out of the air. Be bold to come forward. If not for anything, do it
for the sake of Malaysia.
"If you want to come, come. But if you don't come, don't complain because at the
end of the day we will write a report based on materials that are made available
to us.
"But make sure the evidence you are bringing is reliable, relevant and we will
have to decide on its admissibility. We will use the Evidence Act 1950 (Act 56)
as a guideline."
Those wishing to assist the panel would be required to give their names and
particulars.
"Don't Mr X, Mr Y. If you are coming with a statement, please give one's name,
IC number and how the person can be contacted. We are not a commission of
inquiry. We are not a court of law. If you want to say something, please, you
are most welcome. But, identify yourself and channel it through the
secretariat."
Mahadev said the responsibility for a stable and orderly society was not the
government's alone and that every citizen had the same duty.
"What is your (the people's) responsibility? Somebody out there is holding the
original video. Has the person got a responsibility to have the video produced
so that we can have a look at it to see its content?
"Somebody out there took that video. There may have been others who saw what
happened," he said
He added that the panel would work very closely with the ACA and the police.
Haidar said: "If we cannot (complete the task as scheduled), we will go back to
the government and ask for an extension."
He urged those with information to pass on what they had to the panel's
secretariat, the Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister's Department.
"Our terms of reference are to verify the authenticity of the video clip, it
stops there."
Haidar said those who were afraid they would not be protected when they came
forward with evidence should go to the ACA instead.
 |
News 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 023/2012: Talk on ISO 9001 | 2008 Quality Management System Certification
Before our very eyes are two very senior lawyers, both in fact former senior Judges, taking part in a panel when the Malaysian Bar had asked for a Royal Commission of Inquiry. Why? Simply because they are appointed by the Government, never questioning whether the panel is the best approach to tackle the problem.
Both know and have stated they know that the panel does not have the power to compell witnesses and to protect witnesses. Both must also know that the term of reference is very narrow. And both are proceeding on that footing, probably also knowing that the findings of the panel is not binding.
And one of them appeals to our love for our country to come forward to tell anything we know. I really wonder who is going to buy that line?
Is this all a charade? A dream? If it is, wake me up when it is over. Truly, Malaysia Boleh. Semuanya okay.
Stephen Tan Ban Cheng