Written submission: Royal Commission of Inquiry on VK Lingam video clip

The Royal Commission Of Inquiry ON The Video Clip Recording Which Contain Images of An Advocate & Solicitor Talking Over The Phone With Regard To The Appointment of Judges


UPDATE: The full text of the written submission has now been relocated to ensure easier navigation of this blog. However, you can still read the recommendations here. For the full written text, please click here.

UPDATE 06-03-08, 5.00 pm: I have received complaints that extraneous characters are appearing in the text of the written submission posted here. I’ll be seeking help to solve this glitch but meanwhile it’s recommended that you use Mozilla Firefox

browser temporarily to overcome this problem. Thank you.

Both of them denied that they are closed buddies and yet there was evidence of Dato VK Lingam buying expensive gifts for Tun Eusoff Chin and Dato V K Lingam visited Tun Eusoff Chin in his house at late at night un til past mid night on several occasions. There was evidence from Ms Jeyanthi and Mr Thirunama Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai that Tun Eusoff Chin used to call Dato’ V K Lingam on his mobile phone and direct line in the office. In fact, Mr Thirunama Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai (Dato’ V K Lingam’s brother) could have produced more evidence to show extremely closeness between Tun Eusoff Chin and Dato’ V K Lingam but the Honoourable Commissioner saw it fit to limit Mr Thirunma Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai testimonies to only 4 incidents of extremely closeness when he could have produced more.

….

To recommend appropriate action against those found to have committed any misbehaviour.

1. ACA TO REOPEN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ACTIVITIES OF TUN EUSOFF CHIN, DATUK V K LINGAM, FORMER AG AND OTHER JUDGES (INCLUDING ONE SITTING JUDGE) IMPLICATED BY THE EVIDENCE TENDERED BEFORE THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY.

The said activities of both Tun Eusoff Chin and Dato V K Lingam must be further investigated by the ACA based on the overwhelming evidence produced at the inquiry. It must be noted that at the material time the then Attorney-General (AG), the late Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, was heavily implicated in the ACA investigation and yet he saw it fit to clear Tun Eusoff Chin, Dato’ V K Lingam of other from corruption charges and closed the ACA investigations on the matter. During the Inquiry, photograph was produced as exhibit showing the late Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah was on a holiday trip to Spain with Tan Sri Vincent Tan, Dato V K Lingam and their respective spouses and then they proceeded to Morocco. Please see: exhibit C-58 [the group photo taken in Spain]. Dato’ V K Lingam has admitted that he went on a holiday to Spain with Tan Sri Vincent Tan, Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah.

Therefore, it was most improper for the then AG to close the investigation and clear Tun Eusoff Chin and Dato’ V K Lingam of charges of corruption and corrupt practices when he was heavily implicated in the said investigation. No one should be a judge of his own cause.

1st Recommendation

Based on the above glaring facts, the Honourable Commissioners are duty bound to make a recommendation that the ACA to reopen its investigations into the charges of corruptions and corrupt practices involving Tun Eusoff Chin, Dato’ V K Lingam, the late Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, and other judges like Datuk Mokhtar Sidin, Datuk K L Rekraj and Datuk Low Hop Bing, who is still a sitting judge in the Court of Appeal, as there are more than sufficient evidence to warrant an in-depth investigations into their closed relationship with Dato’ V K Lingam.

  1. TUN EUSOFF CHIN, TUN AHMAD FIRUZ AND DATO V K LINGAM SHOULD BE CHARGED UNDER SECTION 191 PENAL CODE – GIVING FALSE EVIDENCE/PERJURY.

Tun Eusoff Chin and Dato V K Lingam should be charged for giving false evidence/perjury. There was more than enough evidence to show that both of them have been lying through their teeth when they testified before the Commission. Both of them denied that the New Zealand holidays trip were preplanned and both of them testified that they met by chance in Singapore Changi Airport when there was ample evidence to show otherwise. Air plane tickets (exhibit C-69 [1-15]) for both families of Dato V K Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin were purchased from the same travel agent, Holiday Tours Sdn Bhd. Many photographs of both families were produced as evidence. Tun Eusoff Chin travel manifest from Holiday Tours Sdn Bhd was sent to Ms Jeyanthi, Dato V K Lingam’s secretary.

Further, in 1998 Tun Eusoff Chin was quoted by the press to have said that he and Dato V K Lingam met each other by chance in a zoo New Zealand.

Tun Ahmad Fairuz should also be charged for giving false evidence/perjury because he also denied that he was closed to Dato V K Lingam and that he was not the person talking at the other end of the line with Dato’ V K Lingam as shown in the video clip. However, Tun Ahmad Fairuz told the Inquiry that it was a monologue conversation because “suara saya tidak boleh di dengar”.

2nd Recommendation

That Tun Eusoff Chin, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and Dato’ V K Lingam should be charged under section 191 of Penal Code for giving false evidence/perjury.

3. ANOTHER ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY SHOULD BE SET UPTO INVESTIGATE INTO THE ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION OR CORRUPT PRACTICES OR MISCONDUCTS OF RETIRED JUDDGES AND ONE SITTING JUDGE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL.

In exhibit C – 95 there were many more incidents that were prohibited by the Hon Commissioners to tender were:

sending poison pen letters, magazine entitled “Commercial Litigation – Malaysian Justice on Trial” by Euromoney to Tun Eusoff Chin and other judges house;

Dato V K Lingam hosted dinner for judges (Tun Eusoff Chin and Tan Sri Lamin Yunus, the retired President of the Court of Appeal) in his house;

delivering of cakes to Tun Eusoff Chin house;

sending mobile telephone application forms to a judge house for distribution to other judges and to collect the forms back from judges’ house;

delivered 3 bowls of soup to Tun Eusoff Chin’s house,

delivery of a bag to a judge house late at night; and

many other matters of compromising nature were prohibited from producing before the Inquiry.

3. In the course of the investigation, matters that are not within the so-called purview of the Terms of Reference were either disclosed in evidence or totally bared from tendering before the Inquiry and such matters were of public importance. They are as follows:

Dato Wira Low Hop Bing, a judge in the Court of Appeal

Mr Tirunama Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai did testify that he delivered a large brown bag to Dato Low Hop Bing house late at night that it was received by Dato Low personally.

Dato Mokhtar Sidin, a retired Judge of the Court of Appeal

In the evidence of Ms Jeyanthi, she has testified that she was present and the secretary were made to type an amended Grounds of Judgment and that Ground of Judgment was subsequently delivered in a floppy disk to Dato Mokhtar Sidin’s house. The said amended Ground of Judgment became the official Ground of Judgment. In this case, the late Mr MCCG Pillai was ordered by Datuk Mokhtar Sidin to pay RM10 million damages to Tan Sri Vincent Tan. Mr Tirunama Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai further testified that hand phones totaling five units were handed over to Dato Mokhtar Sidin at his house at the instructions of Dato V K Lingam.

In the evidence of Mr Tirunama Karasu A/L Kanda Velupillai, he testified that he was detained in a hotel and was forced by the 3 lawyers, Dato C Vijaya Kumar, Dato Kumarendran and Dato Sitambaram to retract the statement that he earlier made to the ACA. This piece of evidence if found to be true tantamount to interfering with the ACA investigation.

3rd Recommendation

I humbly submit that this Commission, which I would call it the MOTHER of all Commissions, should make recommendations that another Royal Commission with independent members with minimum connection with the judiciary should be immediately set up to further investigate into the alleged corruptions or corrupt practices, which evidence were directly or indirectly produced before the Commission, in general in the judiciary and the tampering/interfering with the ACA investigations.

Lastly, a new Royal Commission should also investigate into the fixing of decision of court cases involving Datuk V K Lingam, as the lawyer for the winning party and the judges that were named by Mr Thirunama Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai, Ms Jeyanthi and Mr Ramachandran in this Inquiry.

Dated 5th March 2008

……………………………

Wee Choo Keong

Counsel for Mr Thirunama Karasu A/L Kandar Velupillai

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Written submission: Royal Commission of Inquiry on VK Lingam video clip

  1. Anonymous

    I salute your fearless stand. Hope, it won’t be another exposeure like Guan Eng’s which landed him in prison.

    Reply
  2. Anonymous

    Bravo! May truth and further truths prevail. May the other counsels also follow suit with courage and dignity!

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

    Hey sir, i kind of like your blog and it’s post. I always kind of think it is cool for a politician to blog. All the best to you.

    Reply
  4. richard

    yB Wee,I know next to nothing about law but is it o.k. to have the written submission published in your blog, especially when its still before the Commission? It worries me and all your supporters in Wangsa Maju should the Yew goon uses legal means to dethrone you. We Wangsa Maju-ians are not willing to lose you any which way.

    Reply
  5. RESIDENT.WANGSAMAJU

    I think this seals the nail to the coffin. Let the Malaysian Judiciary crumble. It’s a hopeless piece of garbage not worthy of its name. It’s run by a bunch of outlaws falsely pretending to administer justice. People have died by it and souls are waiting to be redeemed.Sun Tzu says- let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.Let’s end this and strike while the iron’s hot. Wee Choo Keong- it’s the right thing to do. If he doesn’t do it he’s not our future MP then.

    Reply
  6. Anonymous

    Dear Wee,Your effort of transperancy is very much appreciated. As a experienced lawyer, I think you know what is the best way to protect yourself.

    Reply
  7. Anonymous

    Dear Sdr WeeThank you for posting the Written Submission for the hearingof the Royal Commission on the judicial scandals. We need a brave lawyer and MP like you. We want a MP that cares for the people and inform the people of the truth. We want a MP to fight against covering up job. A MP owes a duty to the people and the nation first. The Government should have another Royal Commission to look into the general allegations of corruptions and corrupt practice in the judiciary, which should be an independent and clean body. But it deosn’t appear be so.We are shocked that Dato V K Lingam wrote ground of judgment for a judge, Dato Moktar Sidin. We are equally shocked that a judge stooped so low to be so corrupted to let a lawyer to write judgment for him. No self respect at all. More importantly, when the judiciary is so corrupted there is no future for the country because there is no more protection for the people. Based on the rotten state of judiciary was enough for me to decide voting against the BN. The state of the judiciary should be our national agenda because without a clean and independent judiciary we will not get foreign investment. If we do not get teh foreign investmetn then the country economy will be affected.Vote wisely my Malaysians brothers and sisters.So lets help to right all the wrongs under BN. Lets vote KeAdilan and Wee Choo Keong.

    Reply
  8. Anonymous

    All is not well withour judiciary. Even a Court of appeal Judge (Low Hop Bing) being implicated in the Lingam video clip scandal)and yet he was aloowed to sit up there to dispense justice. What a big joke?What type of jduciiary we have! In other developed country, Low HopBing will be asked to take leave until and after an investigation into the scnadal.The problem in Malaysia is there is no culture of resigning frm office even when you were implicated in a scandal that rocked the nation.We must vote against BN. We must get rid of the Chair Throwing MCA canidate Yew Teong Look.Vote for WEE. Vote for KeAdilan.

    Reply
  9. Anonymous

    after the election, this judiciary scandal will be closed. soon, everybody forgets and judges will have their holidays again with lawyers. no, there will be no changes and who is to be blamed except the voters themselves. their apathy is one of the main reasons for BN’s victory which signifies that their corrupt behaviour is acceptable.no, unless the winds blow strong enough to effect the change, status quo will return. the poor ill remain poor and the rich will continue to exploit thru their corrupt ways together with the officials. Islam Hadhari or whatever is only a cover for their sham.

    Reply
  10. Anonymous

    Yes, in a way I agree with Anon 17.12But I still hope that this time things will change for the better because the rakyat already saw the light. The rakyat has changed so I belikeve Malaysia will change for the better after 8th March.So We better vote for Wee, the Keadilan candidate. He is the right man to do things for hte people of W. Maju. So we go to the poll with one heart and one mind. We vote KeAdilan. Vote for WEE against injustice and corruption.

    Reply
  11. everydog

    A simple message to the chair throwing MCA candidate – Yew Teong Look. Look, Mr. Yew, everyone is either watching you or learned of you from one to the other that you had been misbehaving and outrageously tantrumic; and being not in control of your unstable emotions, you threw a chair in public. Is that right? Now, Mr. Yew, what is the first thing an MP ought to possess in order to qualify himself in parliament? Self-respect and respect from the voters. You show it and you gain it from others. Good. Again, are you not putting your personal honour and integrity in disrepute and ridicule by being abusive and violent; and in the process “threw a chair in public”? Did not your beloved mother (or you hate her perhaps?) teach you good manners and how to behave yourself in public? You are already an adult and age with its wisdom must have given you second thoughts before you throw a chair and yet you did what is absolutely not what is expected of you and aren’t you not ashamed of yourself? You have no respect even for yourself and can we trust you to respect us the people who are going to vote for you? Can we even tell our children and grandchildren OUR MP MR YEW TEONG LOOK IS A MAN OF GOOD MANNERS and HE IS OUR LEADER? Won’t your mother feel ashamed of your behaviour?If I happen to meet up with your mother, whoever she is, what I will say is that ” Ma’am, my good lady, your son, YEW TEONG LOOK HAS ABSOLUTELY NO MANNERS AT ALL! He threw a chair in public and that’s a fact. He brought shame to the surname Yew, the name of your beloved husband and the respected name of “Yew” in our time-honoured Chinese culture. He brought curse for generations to come to the family-name of Yew.May God bless your wretched soul, Mr. Yew. May your mother wept for you this coming GE12.

    Reply
  12. Anonymous

    everydog,Pls do not touch on personal matter especially the elderly person. Good politicians will be welcomed by the people. Therefore courteousy plays a good role for sucessful candidate.The wangsa maju will have the final decision for their MP.Pls uphold goodwill and respect the elderly.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s