feed
Home arrow News arrow Legal/General News arrow Singapore ex-judge: RCI into plagiarism claim a waste of time
  • Malaysian Bar Web Ads
  • Malaysian Bar Web Ads
  • Malaysian Bar Web Ads
  • Malaysian Bar Web Ads
  • Malaysian Bar Web Ads
Singapore ex-judge: RCI into plagiarism claim a waste of time PDF Print E-mail
Tuesday, 17 January 2012 09:29am
Image©The Star (Used by permission)
by SHAILA KOSHY

KUALA LUMPUR: A Royal Commission of Inquiry into the claim that a judge here had plagiarised from a Singapore judge would be a waste of time.

G.P. Selvam, whose judgment in a 2000 case is the centre of the controversy, said this in refuting DAP chairman Karpal Singh's accusation of lying on the matter to Chief Justice Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria.

On Jan 6, The Star published a statement from the Chief Justice's Office saying Selvam had written on Nov 2 to say he had no cause to complain about plagiarism.

The next day, the daily quoted Karpal accusing the retired Singaporean judge of lying, as it contradicted his statement published in the Singapore Straits Times in 2000.

In that article, Selvam was quoted as saying a Malaysian judge had obtained a copy of his judgment through a lawyer and had “copied chunks from me without acknowledging”, and that the judge had backdated his judgment so “people will think I copied from him”.

In his rebuttal statement, Selvam yesterday said a mutual friend had told him on Aug 28 last year that Karpal would be contacting him about the Malaysian judge and gave him his number.

He said he called Karpal who said, in effect, that he wanted to move for the removal of the judge on the ground of plagiarism.

“He wanted a copy of the complaint I had lodged. I thought he was going to move the court.

“I told him, in effect, that I had not made any complaint to anyone, so I could not help.”

Selvam said he told Karpal there was a minor error in the 2000 report in that the Malaysian judge had “got my judgment before it was reported and not released.”

He said he told Karpal there was no cause for complaint for plagiarism but the lawyer did not agree.

Selvam said the original report was in relation to certain offhand reflections he had made while hearing a copyright infringement case, on the limits of copyright in relation to judgments.

Comments (0)Add Comment

Write comment
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
  • 2012 Bar Council Subscription
    Click the link above to download Circular 072/2012 pertaining to the 2012 Bar Council subscription, including the payment guide and a set of Frequently-Asked-Questions.
  • 2012 Sijil Annual Application Form
    Click the link above to download the 2012 Sijil Annual and Practising Certificate Application Forms.
  • Having difficulty in finding a lawyer?
    Need to find a lawyer to represent you? Just click on the link for the law firms' advertisements.
  • 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.
  • Bar Council Bookshop
    Read MORE … but pay LE$$! Members enjoy a 20% discount on LexisNexis publications at the Bar Council Bookshop. Click on the link above for the list of available titles.
International Malaysia Law Conference (26 to 28 Sept 2012)
Hurry up! The countdown continues and the current promotion rate ends 30 June 2012. Don't miss what is going to be the best conference in the region! On top of that, if you sign up with 5 or more people from the same organisation, we will give you a 10% group discount. Click on the link above to register.
Your Login


We have 83 guests and 1 member online

Malaysian Bar blasts police violence

Bar council: Police brutality worst in Bersih 3.0



show last 4hrs - 24hrs
Google