Zaid Ibrahim Chicken Out!

Karpal seek for Dr Mahathir to be given chance to defend himself. However,
Zaid Ibrahim maintain his oblivity to the new fact presented by Dr Mahathir in press conference and new development of police report made Dato Ibrahim Ali and Matthias Chang on June 26th, 2008.

He said the Government can't be forming Tribunal and Royal Commssion every now and then. The issue is that those enquiries are provided under the law when the cirucmstances arise. It is not when the Government feels like doing it.

On Dr Mahathir's claim that judges accepting ex-gratia are accepting bribes to demonise him, Zaid asked the matter to be put to rest. That is the most inappropriate answer. It shows Zaid does not have a clear defensible position.

It looks like Zaid is chickening out from taking any position and decision. He is ruuning away from justifiying his actions too!

Give Chance To Defend

Karpal's comment as reported by The Star June 28th, 2008 below:

Give Dr M chance to defend himself, says Karpal

KUALA LUMPUR: Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad should be given every opportunity to defend himself over the allegations made by High Court Judge Datuk Ian Chin, said DAP chairman Karpal Singh.

In a statement, Karpal Singh said, according to Justice Chin, Dr Mahathir had threatened judges in 1997 to decide in favour of the Government, and had sent judges to boot camp.

He said Justice Chin had made serious allegations against Dr Mahathir during proceedings in an election petition in Sibu.

“However, these allegations have been made by the judge under the cloak of absolute immunity. Justice Chin should not abuse the process of court to make disclosures condemning Dr Mahathir,” he added.

He said Justice Chin should be brave enough to make statements against Dr Mahathir bereft of the cloak of absolute immunity to give the former premier an opportunity to take him on in a court of law.

“Dr Mahathir has now made certain allegations against Justice Chin and called for the setting up of a tribunal against him for judicial misconduct.

“There should be no discrimination. The law is no respecter of persons,” Karpal Singh said.

He said if Dr Mahathir's allegations had merit, then the necessary action should be taken against Justice Chin.

“Dr Mahathir has every right to pursue the allegations he has made.”

Likewise, Karpal Singh said, the Government should not in any way act to give the perception to the public that Dr Mahathir no longer enjoyed the rights of a citizen to demand justice.

Simply Ignore

Zaid's reply as reported by Bernama report dated June 29th, 2008 below:

'No basis to probe claim of judge's misconduct'

KOTA BARU: There is no need to set up a tribunal to investigate judge Datuk Ian Chin's alleged breaches of the judicial code of ethics, as the government believes that the allegations had no basis. Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said if former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad or others had proof of Chin's alleged misconduct, they could report the matter to the police or the chief justice.

"The government cannot be setting up a tribunal every now and then, just because someone says it should do so," he said after opening the 40th annual meeting of the Malaysian Ex-Servicemen Association yesterday.

On Thursday, Dr Mahathir had asked the government whether it would set up a tribunal to investigate Chin's alleged misconduct.

Dr Mahathir claimed that while Chin revealed on June 9 that judges were threatened and sent to a boot camp by the former prime minister, he did not reveal that there was a police report lodged against him for alleged breaches of the judicial code of ethics for hearing a case in which he had an interest.

Zaid said for the record, Chin had discharged his duties well.

The government, he said, had no intention of interfering in the problems between the judge and the former prime minister.

Zaid, the de-facto law minister, also urged all parties to stop demanding that the government reveal the amount of ex gratia payments made to six former judges, who were either sacked or suspended during the 1988 judicial crisis.

He said the government had to respect the wishes of the recipients and their family members, that the amount was to be kept private.

"Besides, it was the government which suggested the payments.

"Let us put the issue to rest as the government wants to settle the matter amicably," he said.

The goodwill ex gratia payment was announced by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on April 18.

The government made the last and final payment on June 20 to former lord president Tun Salleh Abas, who was sacked during the crisis, along with Supreme Court judges Datuk Seri George Seah and Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh.

Three other judges were suspended for three months.

They were Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh. -- Bernama

As revealed by Dato Ibrahim Ali last week in a function in Telok Intan, it is believed that each judges were given RM1.5 million. Thats a total sum RM6 million.

What is the justification to pay these judges without having to undergo the "due process"? It also raises the issue of how does Government spend its money? Do they not go through process of budget, allocations, collective decisions and etc.?

What is the justification for Zaid to say that Chin had discharged his duty well when compelling evidence and supporting judgements are made against Chin?

Isn't Chin as a former Berjaya politician with dedicated hatred and personal experiance involving Syed Kecik in conflict when he presided over a case involving Syed Kechik and the Federal Court has questioned the judgements he made?

So how do you address judges misconduct if not by a Tribunal or Royal Commission? Is the Government's position that judges are free to do anyrthing that fancies them?

With the sort of judicial considerations to be given by a lawyer who was convicted of bribery by UMNO, can one expect a true judicial reform? Or it is lip service for political survival for Abdullah?

Its getting clear that the critical issue on the judiciary is not systematic but human in nature, meaning its the fault of lawyers and judges!