1. We hear a lot about litigation these days. Everyone is suing everyone else for hundreds of millions of Ringgit for alleged libel. Almost all the litigants are politicians. The courts’ time is taken up with these cases. Some go on for years as the litigants appeal to higher and higher courts.
2. We hardly ever hear any of these litigations ending with the courts awarding the sum claimed by the complainants. In most cased the complainant would lose the case and ordered to pay cost.
3. The public usually do not have a high regard for these litigants. The disparaging utterances against them would not damage their reputation at all. Maybe justice demands that the whole legal process be gone through and a judgment be made by a court and the appeals be heard. But on the other hand, in some instances in order not to waste the time of the courts, the case may be curtly dismissed, and appeals disallowed. One wonders why there is this extreme disparity in the treatment of these cases.
4. Although the defendant may feel sure that he will not be ordered to cough up the hundred millions of Ringgit or failing that be made a bankrupt, nevertheless there is still the odd possibility that he may lose the case and be bankrupted. And so for the years of trials and appeals he would be mentally stressed. Of course he would be impoverished also as he has to pay lawyers to defend him. Additionally he loses his freedom of speech with regards to the matters before the courts.
5. For all his sufferings he would if found not guilty be awarded cost (minimal and not actual). By comparison to the hundreds of millions he was sued for, the cost awarded him would be a minute amount. And he has to part with it to pay his lawyers. For the defendant, he gains nothing but will certainly lose something. Yet in the eyes of the public the libel charges were obviously frivolous and a waste of the time of the courts.
6. There is something unfair in this even though it may be regarded as just. You are threatened with being made a bankrupt if you lose but when the complainant loses, he has to pay a minute fraction of the amount he was suing for.
7. With this prospect people can sue with impunity. There is nothing to lose and much to gain. And if you are a politician you get a bonus by effectively shutting up the mouth of your opponent for years and years.
Salam Tun.
Allow me to reply on the comments by ‘kiddo’ (13/04/11 @20:37pm & 15/04/11 @12:41pm).
The ‘kiddo’ was correct when he mentioned the court awarded Vincent Tan RM10m during Dr. M’s time. But the ‘kiddo’ pretended to forget and chose to ignore that Kit Siang was continuously barking & howling mad then “why is this Vincent Tan very close with Anwar?”
Anwar was MOF then, and when his ‘cravings’ became uncontrollable Vincent Tan was ever ready to help out. Now you get the picture kiddo? Vincent Tan became very successful due to Anwar! The whole DAP top-guns keep belittling Anwar then!
Come on kiddo, it’s not good for a ‘warga emas’ to be a perpetual liar. You keep saying about paying income tax, being a warga emas?
You told us you own 30+ websites, but on a different occasion you’re only a rundown church mouse and can’t afford to buy Dr. M’s memoirs in hardcover and requested Dr. M to print on paperback!
Ecompute, you are just a typical liar and a hypocrite, and being a warga emas you should be very ashamed to your children.
Ezani
There is a reason why the adversarial legal system is fussy and time consuming. It is structured in such a way to minimise errors to give the best possible outcome as truthful as possible.
Jury trial provides a dynamic of a third person’s reasoning. A judge may give a judgment which is tainted with subjectiveness and a jury trail seeks to counter that by introducing the objectiveness of a peer judgment. Juries have to be unanimous in their judgment or in some countries, a majority verdict. Again providing a safety net.
Do not be silly, one ruling will not override previous precedent. It depends on whether the ruling is from a higher court or a lower court. Besides, these precedents form common law which is flexible with the flow of time and coincides with the needs of the people. Even a ruling which overrules previous precedent can be overruled. Precedents are like guidelines which may or may not be followed. It doesn’t mean precedents must be strictly followed.
I agree with you that the adversarial system should be simplified but some technicalities are inevitable. These technicalities are in placed, ironically, to reduce delays and to provide certainly. Rules on pleadings are necessary to ensure that each party properly plead their case according to the method and scope defined by the rules. This avoids, for example, some one pleading everything which may not be relevant to the matter thus causing impending delays.
Rules and technicallity can also be associated with natural justice. Rules regarding to disclosure is one of them. It allows each party to know the other party’s strength and evidence relied upon.
Agree that it is hard to determine whether a judge is neutral. Again it comes down the separation of power and the government to not interfere with the judiciary. Something that the government has failed to lift up to. Yes agree, that judges sometimes do not have the expertise. That is why judges must be carefully rostered to hear a case which he or she is familiar. A judge can subpoena an expert witness to provide clarity to the judge in determine the legality in tedious areas such as risky financial lending.
No legal system is fraudproof. Evidence can always be fabricated. And yes, innocent people can be put to jail if most evidence is against them. This happens even in Islamic legal system. 2 male men can just fabricate evidence a tribunal practicing sharia law and cause a person his arms to be chopped off. Sharia law is also gender bias. Female cannot be accounted as witness in a criminal tribunal. These do not reflect the progress of society which is moving towards gender equality.
In some sharia legal system, the tribunal also enforces the law and later on judge the accused. That is already a profound breach of the ideals of separation of power. The judge has already carried in his mind a degree of biasness towards the accused since he was the one collecting evidence instead of scrutinising them.
I am indeed surprised to hear from ezani that “when the British colonialists left us, they forced us to accept their legal process as part of the deal for independence”. I wonder how far this is true as independence means a sovereign state. In any case, even the Constitution has been amended 42 times since independence, so what is preventing Malaysia from improving on the British system, if it is said to be defective? By the way, what is Padang Mashyar? Can you elaborate and show in what way it is the best court?
Tun,
Please help the Sarawakians from the greedy manipulaters. If you use GoogleMap, please zoom in and scroll the images to the jungle in Sarawak and compare it with Indonesian border in the same area, you can see the trails of loggings with not-so-minimal foot-prints on it. I saw the trails while fying low from Miri to Bario and Bakalalan that these trails are contributing to landslides. For all the logging that had been done, it was contributed to only few VIP people that now had become so rich.
The Sarawakians are still poor. Compare to Sabah, the neighbour.
Have you seen the one-lane ‘highway’ from Miri to Bintulu? it was full of potholes and bumpers. And all of small ‘developments’ are not whole-heartedly done and only came within the last year of political term.
You can see the rich castle blooming at Luak bay roads and you can see the local (and not PTI) small woden houses everywhere by the river.
it was a sad..sad.. situation. Never before i’ve seen leaders in a state that become so rich while stripping bare his own state.
sad.. really.
-Mirian.
Salam YAB & diKasihi Tun,
TAHNIAH BN kerana kekal berkuasa di Sarawak!
Tahniah kepada mereka yang mengundi BNâ¦Saya setuju dengan cadangan blogger berikut :
///
By sudin on April 17, 2011 1:49 PM
The Sarawak elections results clearly showed the strong Bumiputra support for BN, which easily managed to obtain the 2/3 majority. It’ll be most unfair if the Bumiputras are not accorded big rewards in return for their strong support, besides the special Bumiputra privilege which is specified in the constitution.
///
BN mesti JAGA HATI KAUM BUMIPUTRA yang memberi sokongan padu. Beri prioriti/ tumpuan kepada kawasan-kawasan yang menyokong BN terutamanya dari segi pembangunan.
Tiada guna melayan permintaan mereka yang tidak menyokong BN kerana mereka tetap akan mengundi pembangkang walaupun kesemua permintaan mereka ditunaikan. Kita tidak akan maju jika sentiasa melayan UGUTAN dari pembangkang yang cuma pentingkan diri sendiri & bersikap tamak haloba.
Terima kasih Tun.
** Semoga Allah SWT sentiasa melindungi Tun sekeluarga **
Good morning Ayahanda Tun,
From ST….PM Lee on the 24 new candidates
By Elgin Toh
Captioned: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong gave his take on the 24 new People’s Action Party candidates. — ST PHOTO: JOYCE FANG
IN HIS speech at the 25th anniversary celebrations of Young PAP on Sunday, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong gave his take on the 24 new People’s Action Party candidates.
Here’s what he had to say:
1. Desmond Choo: ‘He started out as a police scholar. He’s no stranger to tough battles.’
2. Ong Ye Kung: ‘He’s now the executive secretary of the NTWU (National Transport Workers’ Union) and also chairman of NTUC’s e2i, and he will work hard for workers.’
3. Janil Puthucheary: ‘Janil grew up in Malaysia but married a Singaporean and made Singapore his home. He’s a paediatric intensivist, which means he takes care of the sickest babies and children in KK Hospital.’
4. Foo Mee Har: ‘She’s worked in China and Thailand other than in Singapore so, truly an international experience.’
5. Desmond Lee Ti-Seng: ‘He was doing very well in the legal service, we spotted him, we asked him, he agreed to stand as a candidate because he wanted to improve the system that he had benefitted from.’
6. Steve Tan: ‘(His) father used to work for the PUB so he lived in a one-room flat in PUB quarters at Woodleigh, which is in the Potong Pasir area. Later on his parents bought an HDB flat, also in Potong Pasir and they still live there. He still lives in Potong Pasir too.’
7. Zainal Sapari: ‘He knows about hard work because his father used to hold three jobs. He was a cleaner, a security officer and also a gardener, all at the same time, and he did this to feed the family.’
8. Gan Thiam Poh: ‘The father was an odd-job labourer. As a young boy, he was going house to house selling home-made popiah. Now he wants to give back to society.’
9. Tin Pei Ling: ‘She may be young but I think she has steel in her and she knows how to connect with people and that makes all the difference on the ground.’
10. Vikram Nair: ‘He speaks Tamil and Malayalam which is quite useful for connecting with older residents.’
11. Ang Hin Kee: ‘Hin Kee introduced himself as a repeat student because he took the O levels twice but eventually he made it, he went to NUS. So he knows what failure and disappointment means but also how to pick himself up and succeed the second time.’
12. Ang Wei Neng: ‘Wei Neng knows a lot about transportation because he works in SBS Transit and manages 1,600 public buses but that’s not so hard. What is tougher is managing 3,000 staff, including 2,800 bus drivers.’
13. Edwin Tong: ‘Very quiet and modest person but I am confident that as an MP he will care for his residents and look after their interests.’
14. Low Yen Ling: ‘At first she started working in a bank, then she left to join a start-up, the start-up didn’t do well. Subsequently she worked for EDB.’
15. Tan Chuan-Jin: ‘He served as army attache in Jakarta for one year, learnt Bahasa Indonesia, got in touch with the Indonesian senior officers and later he commanded the SAF tsunami mission in Meulaboh in Aceh, where this experience proved invaluable. When I visited Meulaboh during the tsunami, he showed me around and he was on top of the situation.’
16. Patrick Tay: ‘Patrick believes in volunteering. He’s been involved in grassroots work for 25 years although he’s only 40 years old and he comes highly recommended by Prof Jayakumar.’
17. Intan Azura Mokhtar (Tudung and humble Muslim): ‘We interviewed Intan before and after her latest baby. She was a lecturer at Abu Dhabi University so she’s quite adaptable and I’m very happy to have her in the Jalan Kayu branch in Ang Mo Kio GRC.’
18. Lawrence Wong: ‘Served in various ministries. In Finance, he implemented schemes to help Singaporeans cope with restructuring. In the Ministry of Health, he helped Khaw Boon Wan to improve the Medishield system with the Medishield reforms. Most recently he was CEO of the Energy Markets Authority.’
19. David Ong Kim Huat: ‘He grew up in a two-room flat in Queenstown but made himself a successful businessman, running his own publishing firm.’
20. Alex Yam: ‘Grew up in a well-to-do family but has believed in community service from young.’
21. Heng Swee Keat: ‘Grew up in a kampong but made it to Cambridge.’
22. Ong Teng Koon: ‘He introduced himself as a heartlander because he grew up in Ang Mo Kio and still lives there with his extended family nearby, so he’s one of my reliable voters.’
23. Sim Ann: ‘Both parents Chinese educated and herself, as you have heard, completely bilingual and represents a new generation of bilingual Singaporeans, like Gan Thiam Poh and Tin Pei Ling.’
24. Chan Chun Sing: ‘Another RI boy with humble beginnings. He preferred to join the Scouts for his CCA but he hesitated because the Scouts had to pay for their uniforms whereas NPCC uniforms were free. But finally he did become a scout and he picked up navigating skills which proved useful when he went to NS.’
Common Sense:
A. In Sarawak, 650k voters casted their votes.
B. If Malaysia has official registered citizens of 28 million, then the GE10 Sarawak only managed to get 650,000/28,000,000 = 2.321428571% voice.
C. With this %, Malaysia is not ready with Democracy.
D. PM should call for GE13th within this year if he is committed with 1 Malaysia concept.
Good day Ayahanda Tun.
Hi Tun,
May I quickly pass Amin Tan a message. Thank you, Tun.
Hi Amin,
I’ve passed you a similar message under “Melayu oh Melayu”, but I’m afraid the thread might have run its course, but this message seems urgent as it is on the safety issue. I summarize what I wrote, here:
If anyone calls or meets you and claims to be jolly, it is not jolly. I will not appear physically anywhere, nor will I call anyone anytime, unless thru Tun’s blog. Just a word of caution.
Salam Tun.
The Sarawak elections results clearly showed the strong Bumiputra support for BN, which easily managed to obtain the 2/3 majority. It’ll be most unfair if the Bumiputras are not accorded big rewards in return for their strong support, besides the special Bumiputra privilege which is specified in the constitution.
Only the greedy & ungrateful ones will complain if all the election promises to areas won by the opposition are thrown into the drain! They are basically opportunists, and they want the best of both worlds (which they have continually enjoyed ever since before independence).
KM Taib must make sure his successor can enjoy the same Bumiputra support in future elections, and this he can achieve by giving utmost priority ONLY to areas which supported the BN.
The Sarawak elections also gave very clear message to PM Najib and BN; the same group of people enjoyed being labeled as opposition, and they don’t & won’t attest to the 1Malaysia concept despite all efforts together with ‘sweets’ showered to them, so be it!
Now that Anwar the maniac is ‘dying’, BN must hasten his death!
Arising from the Sarawak elections results, I wish to give my humble recommendation to KM Taib:
1. The number of Deputy KM must be reduced to reflect the wishes of the Sarawak people.
2. State cabinet representation among the ethnic groups and their respective portfolios must be fair to the number of seats each ethnic group represents in the BN government.
3. Now that the Pan-Borneo Highway is under construction, plans for new townships along the highway to cater for Bumiputra business needs must be the priority.
CONGRATULATIONS BARISAN NASIONAL!!
Salam Tun.
The Sarawak elections results clearly showed the strong Bumiputra support for BN, which easily managed to obtain the 2/3 majority. It’ll be most unfair if the Bumiputras are not accorded big rewards in return for their strong support, besides the special Bumiputra privilege which is specified in the constitution.
Only the greedy & ungrateful ones will complain if all the election promises to areas won by the opposition are thrown into the drain! They are basically opportunists, and they want the best of both worlds (which they have continually enjoyed ever since before independence).
KM Taib must make sure his successor can enjoy the same Bumiputra support in future elections, and this he can achieve by giving utmost priority ONLY to areas which supported the BN.
The Sarawak elections also gave very clear message to PM Najib and BN; the same group of people enjoyed being labeled as opposition, and they don’t & won’t attest to the 1Malaysia concept despite all efforts together with ‘sweets’ showered to them, so be it!
Now that Anwar the maniac is ‘dying’, BN must hasten his death!
Arising from the Sarawak elections results, I wish to give my humble recommendation to KM Taib:
1. The number of Deputy KM must be reduced to reflect the wishes of the Sarawak people.
2. State cabinet representation among the ethnic groups and their respective portfolios must be fair to the number of seats each ethnic group represents in the BN government.
3. Now that the Pan-Borneo Highway is under construction, plans for new townships along the highway to cater for Bumiputra business needs must be the priority.
CONGRATULATIONS BARISAN NASIONAL!!
Assalamualaikum Tun.
Kenapa tenaga kerja amah selalu menjadi isu antara Indonesia dan majikan Malaysia Tun?
Kerajaan Malaysia tak pandai handle ke Tun?
Terima kasih Tun.
YABhg. Tun,
Salam hormat. Memang sudah menjadi lumrah, orang orang politik saman menyaman untuk menegak kebenaran, menghukum dan yang menggunakan mahkamah untuk mengaibkan seseorang. Trend ini akan menular ke rakyat Malaysia pula kerana kalau kita membaca blog-blog dan komen komen yang dilemparkan oleh pembaca pembaca boleh membawa saman menyaman. Pemilik pemilik blog harus berhati hati. Kerana inginkan populariti blognya, membiarkan pembaca pembaca membuat komen yang kotor, lucah, membuat tuduhan melulu dan menglabel pendapat orang lain sebagai bodoh dan tidak berakal.
Trend ini, kalau tidak dikawal, berkemungkinan ramai rakyat Malaysia menggunakan proses undang undang untuk menghukum….untuk keuntungan.
Salam Tun
A very good afternoon to you on this barakah Friday afternoon. The Malaysian legal process is flawed because we copied a UK system. We did not study it for suitability before implementing it in Malaysia (Semenanjung Tanah Melayu, in 1957, to be exact) but when the British colonialists left us, they forced us to accept their legal process as part of the deal for independence. Here are some weaknesses I have observed:-
1. UK legal system is so full of twists and turns and technicalities and one can even be confused by using the legal jargons alone! A good legal system should be clear and the truth should clearly be visible to all as clearly as possible.
2. Due to the shortage of lawers and judges (or quota), the many cases must wait a long queue.
3. As I said in 1. above, the process is already very time-consuming but when you add the appeals system and legal processes, the waiting time is unbearable.
4. The system can easily be exploited as you clearly illustrated in this blog article.
5. The precedent – all you need is one precedent, and all the past cases which went against the precedent will be irrelevant.
6. It is very hard to prove the neutrality or the expertise of the judge for any particular individual case being heard and the specific circumstances for each individual case.
7. The concepts of ‘jury’, ‘evidence’ and barristers ‘cross-examining’ each other are not perfect and sometimes can be exploted. For example, a jury can only make verdicts based on what is presented before them in court as presented by the barristers. The barristers can say anything but obviously they say based on human reasoning. But what if the truths and evidences have still not been brought to the courts (eg. not yet found, have been destroyed, etc.)?
Evidence can be fabricated or concealed
Also, one weakness which most people do not realise is that innocent victims can be framed as if they were there at the murder scene or as if they had committed the crime.
This is because there is no 100% way in this world to tell whether the witness is speaking the truth.
So in summary, the best court is padang mashyar.
Excerpts from Malaysia’s Judiciary:
“Sri Ram referred, in particular, to the suit that started it all – the RM10 million suit brought by tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan against several persons, including freelance journalist M.G.G. Pillai… But we think the time has come when we should check the trend set by that case.”
Tun’s present article therefore seems to be 16 years behind time. Had he written this article in 1995 when he was then the Prime Minister, it would have carried much, much more weight and we might not see this trend where “everyone is suing everyone else for hundreds of millions of Ringgit for alleged libel”.
Salam Tun,
To Sudin, very interesting comment you made about the Bar Council. Please forward to the “Star” newspaper since a number of lawyers read that newspaper. There are a number of us lawyers know that this is true but refuse to admit it.
Assalamualaikum WBT YAB Tun,
Izinkan saya mengulas serba sedikit isu pendakwaan (litigant)di mahkamah khususnya orang politik yang Tun bangkitkan dalam Bahasa Malaysia.
Pada amya mungkin tidak ramai yang betul-betul berminat mengikuti perkembangan isu-isu pendakwaan orang-orang politik terhadap seseorang lain di mahkamah yang didedahkan melalui media (media cetak dan elektronik)lebih-lebih lagi bagi golongan muda yang kurang berminat mengambil tahu hal ehwal politik. Mungkin ianya disebabkan isu yang tidak banyak menyentuh perihal kepentingan kehidupan rakyat, ianya hanya berkisar kepada kepentingan orang-orang individu politik tertentu. Orang-orang politik tertentu amat gemar menggunakan mahkamah jika perlu bagi mencari kebenaran dan pada masa yang sama menaikkan imej diri jika ia menang dalam pendakwaannya di mahkamah terhadap musuh politiknya.
Kadang-kadang sebarang pendakwaan di mahkamah mengambil masa begitu lama untuk diputuskan oleh hakim, dan ini boleh menyebabkan orang ramai naik bosan untuk terus mengikuti perkembangan sesuatu pendakwaan itu. Memang benar seperti pandangan Tun adakalanya yang membuat pendakwaan dikenakan bayaran tertentu oleh mahkamah jika kes pendakwaannya tidak berasas dan sebagainya. Jika dilihat dari segi masa dan kos adakalanya amat merugikan. Sebaiknya sebelum sesuatu pendakwaan dibuat di mahkamah, cubalah diteliti sebarang isu yang timbul dengan lebih berkesan mencari punca masalah, cara penyelesaian yang bersesuaian, dan jika perlu tidak membuat pendakwaan di mahkamah. Mahkamah terpaksa menggunakan masa yang lebih lama dan diikuti dengan kos yang terus meningkat dalam usaha menegakkan keadilan bagi kedua-dua pihak, iaitu pihak pendakwa dan yang didakwa.
Nampaknya amalan saman menyaman dan pendakwaan di mahkamah sudah begitu berleluasa di masa kini, mungkin diantaranya didorong oleh kemampuan kewangan yang lebih oleh pihak pendakwa dan tidak perlu berfikir panjang memeningkan kepala dan dengan mudah serahkan kepada mahkamah untuk menyelesaikan masalahnya. Mungkin juga pada pandangan orang politik atau golongan yang lebih berkemampuan dapat membina imej melalui keputusan mahkamah terhadap sesuatu masalah yang dihadapi yang memihak kepada mereka.
Walau apapun elekolah sama-sama kita fikirkan sebelum sesuatu isu atau masalah yang dihadapi diserahkan kepada mahkamah untuk memutuskannya, kerana faktur masa dan kos yang terus meningkat akan lebih merunsingkan kita, kecuali sudah tiada jalan lain selain dari ditentukan oleh mahkamah.
Sekian, terima kasih dan Wassalam Tun.
Aiyoh, move on lah DS!
How many times do you want to grate on the same issue while the nation is burning from endemic corruption, mismanagement and looting by elites and their cronies?
As Nixon said, if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen!
dpp
we are all of 1 Race, the Human Race
Hi Tun,
May I use a case study related to an active contributor in Tun’s blog to highlight my opinion regarding this issue.
There was once a person in Tun’s blog said:
“I asked my son to bypass the Isreali or Pakatan Rakyat blockade of your blog”
Such a statement was made without any proof. If such practice is against a commandment of God, and everybody sees no problem with it, will such a society will be blessed?
Ref: (Exodus 20 (KJV))
Quote
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Unquote
Further, it was said by the same person, “I am delighted you are a muslim and we are brothers.”
Such a statement implies favouritsm.
Scripture teaches that God wants all people, both the rich and the poor, to be saved in heaven. God is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). God would “have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4). Christ died for all (Hebrews. 2:9; John 3:16).
IF we practice favourism, instead of we glorifying God, we are abusing God’s name to glorify ourselves.
Thank you Tun.
Salam YAB & diKasihi Tun,
1. Pendapat saya mengenai isu SAMAN FITNAH agak berlainan dari pendapat Tun (walaupun saya faham & setuju dengan point 7 â salah guna mahkamah). Pada pandangan saya adalah PERLU untuk seseorang mengambil langkah untuk menyaman pihak yang MEMFITNAH (âgenuine caseâ; ada bukti kukuh) beliau jika fitnah tersebut boleh menyebabkan ramai orang yang akan terpengaruh dan mempercayai fitnah tersebut. Bagi saya semuanya bergantung kepada NIAT kita apabila menyaman pihak yang memfitnah kita.
2. Ada seorang pemimpin kanan PKR yang memfitnah Tun dalam ceramah beliau yang berkaitan dengan Video Seks yang pelakunya mirip pemimpin pembangkang. Beliau secara terang-terang menuduh UMNO, dan secara spesifik menyebut nama Tun, DS Najib, dan Datin Seri Rosmah sebagai mereka yang bertanggung-jawab terlibat dalam penghasilan âVideo Seksâ tersebut (saya terjumpa klip video ceramah tersebut di Internet).
3. Saya sarankan supaya Tun menyaman pemimpin berkenaan untuk MENUTUP MULUT beliau. Tun harus/mesti berbuat demikian untuk membantu mereka yang tidak boleh berfikir secara WARAS (yang percaya dengan fitnah tersebut tanpa berfikir; bagi saya mereka ini samada buta hati ataupun teramat dungu kerana masih lagi percaya dengan KELENTONG Anwar dan koncu2 beliau).
4. Satu lagi, banyaknya duit Anwar untuk membayar yuran guaman kepada peguam-peguam handalanâ¦cuma orang DUNGU saja yang PERCAYA dengan kesucian Anwar yang disifatkan oleh isteri beliau sebagai âAnugerah Allahâ. Dari dulu lagi (semasa beliau TPM) saya sudah menyampah dengan cara beliau bercakap â penuh dengan kepura-puraan/hipokrit. Tenyata penilaian saya terhadap perwatakan beliau benar. Jadi, bila Tun memecat beliau kerana isu moral, saya antara mereka yang tidak terkejut.
5. Seorang lagi manusia yang tidak boleh dipercayai ialah Raja Petra. Saya harap UMNO/BN tidak terpedaya dengan orang sebegini.
Terima kasih Tun.
** Semoga Allah SWT sentiasa melindungi Tun sekeluarga **
Hi Tun,
In my opinion,
We need to study the practices of those communities ranked among the top3 in Human Development Index, hopefully their histories will give us a clue.
e.g. Do they glorify God? If they do, how do they glorify God, in their flags? In their laws and policies? In their daily lives?
If we are already among top in the list, then only we need to think hard to find a solution to our problems.
Thanks Tun.
Salam Sejahtera Tun.
Tun saya merasakan kalau Tun masih memegang tampuk kepimpinan kes Anwar dah lama selesai,Tanah KTMB pun tak tergadai dan jembatan bengkok pun telah terbina.
Terima Kasih Tun
Dear Sir ,
The question here is , why in the very first place of having the court to get into litigation by the litigants who are politically motivated ? Is it because for ” political justice ” to prevail ?
No doubt that the court under the constitution has vested with the power of rendering judgements , hearing and deciding appeals .But the court has also its judicial discretion .
I think , the Malaysian court has less knowledge , experience and the judgement value in its discretion to handle political litigation .
However , the court must consider to exercise the wisdom of deterrence to avoid mockery of it’s court . Meaning , if someone is sued for hundreds millions of ringgit and if the litigant lost the case , it is the discretion of the court to have the litigant pays the defendant of the amount sued . The litigant is accountable for his litigation . The wisdom is that , litigation is not for the sake of litigation . After all , most of the political litigations were arbitrary and abusive in nature , I think .
Dear Tun,
May I refer to By eanisazman on April 12, 2011 4:12 PM
Dear Tun,
I am fully agree with you and also Amin Tan.
Best regards.
Mr eanisazman, I appreciate your support. thank you.
amin tan
Tun, if I recollect correctly, the libel trend began with Vincent Tan being awarded RM10 million in 1995, that is, if my memory does not fail me. It was under Tun’s time, isn’t it? And the poor High Court Judge… he blew the whistle when Abdullah Ahmad Badawi became Prime Minister and unwittingly fell into Abdullah’s rhetoric and lost his pension.
Dear Mahathir
I for one feel that your comments are arguable. Litigation can be, if conducted effectively, can positively impact us in the way we value humanity and also to protect the weak and innocent.
Do ignore the mumbo jumbo uttered by high profile lawyers. There are also noble lawyers who respect the rule of law and the separation of power. This is something you have ought to think about when you are in power. We are no stranger to the fact that you think less of the courts when you were in power.
Like any common law country, the courts will be able to “create” law, another sweet agony of Dicey’s philosophy. This blasphemy in itself induces the Parliament to legislate law to provide some certainty.
So if people stop suing each other, the law will not progress and will in the future fail to take into account the needs of the people.
I have talked before in my other posts, the culture of suing should be encouraged. Before you bombard me with insults, listen up.
I for one was shocked at the many bus accidents Malaysia has experienced no so long ago. If the culture of suing was predominant in Malaysia, this may not have happened at all.
You see, the law provides us with rights. The court’s job is to upheld those rights and it is the lawyer’s job to assist you in claiming you rights. Simple equation here.
If you have heard of the term “tort” you are well aware that tort is very very effective against negligent bus drivers and the bus companies who are vicariously liable for their drivers.
Bus companies are all about the money. They are not afraid of government enforcers like the JPJ and the police because they know they can just bribe them. If they had to pay a fine, it would be peanuts for them.
With that in mind, what if you introduce a heftier punishment to them, not just from the government but from the victims and family members of the victims. Increase the angle of attack. Negligent cases are the achilles heel of many businesses. If 20 people die from a single bus accident and the courts were to find that the bus company was negligent, the pay out to the victims would be insane. So much compensation that the bus company may even go bust. Get it, bus bust. Meh, nevermind
If one bus company kena, im sure the other bus companies will strictly abide with their safety prodecures fearing that they might experience the same fate. The government and the people will definitely benefit from it. The people will enjoy a safer and comfortable ride and the government will not have to spend so much money enforcing the law.
Now apply this scenario to other businesses, say food manufacturing and other service related industries. Make businesses understand that if the flaunt the law, they pay the price.
You people must remember, your entitlement to sue is a basic right. If you are not happy with the government for putting 20 bullets into your child, you should sue them. If you are not happy with the government because your dad jumped from a third floor of a building for cooperating with the government, you should sue them. If you are not happy that the government is taking away your land because they say it is for a construction of a trainline but it turns out to be bogus, hire Kapal Singh and sue them.
Do not be afraid, i am very sure there are still judges out there who will uphold the rule of law. Evidently, i believe the Bar Council is doing just that too.
At the end of the day, it is the courts which will protect you, not the government or the lawmakers whose party formed the government of the day.
Assalamualaikum Tun…
Thanks for explaining things clearly and is easily understood.
Money can change a person, no matter what road to a better or the worse. Money is also capable of turning a religious figure to be a superficial knowledge.
Perhaps, the country’s judicial system should be changed slightly. I mean, the suit should be commensurate with the financial ability of a person
Post Free Classified Ads in Malaysia
Salam TUN,
ini antara dialog/artikel menarik by YB Zul, semoga rakyat dapat panduan untuk hadapi cabaran tipu helah akhir zaman…
http://zul4kulim.blogspot.com/2011/04/dialog-kebenaran.html
———————————————————
Salam 2 all.
Kebetulan teman singgah solat disebuah Masjid (nama tidak akan disebut). Selepas solat, kebetulan ada ceramah oleh seorang Ustad kawan teman yang juga aktivitis sebuah parti politik. (juga nama tidak akan disebut). Semasa berceramah, kawan teman ini tidak perasan yang teman ada disitu. Teman pun dok berlonggok dengan para jemaah masjid yang lain, yang ada dalam 30-50 orang, termasuk jemaah wanita (agaknya yang lain ke Sarawak kot).
Ustad kawan teman ini memulakan ceramah dengan membaca Surah Al Hujurat ayat 6 dan An Nur ayat 4. Lalu beliau mengupas tentang isu videoklip dan mendakwa ianya adalah satu fitnah besar menuduh orang berzina (cara dia kupas macam dia yang buat videoklip tu, walaupun sebenarnya dia tengok pun tak lagi). Malah beliau menyebut terus nama manusia yang ditabal bininya sebagai anugerah tuhan sebagai mangsa fitnah zina, dan mendakwa mereka yang menuduh sebagai layak dihukum qazaf. Malah beliau menambah bahawa beliau hairan mengapa YAB Dato’ Sri Najib boleh terlepas daripada tuduhan membunuh Altantuya sebaliknya “insan suci” (ni perkataan Ustad tu yop) Anwar Ibrahim terus difitnah.
Kemudian Ustad ni membawa kisah Nabi Yusuf a.s yang turut menjadi mangsa fitnah. Dan cara beliau bawa cerita tu seolah-olah Anwar dan Nabi Yusuf sama taraf yop!!!
Kebetulan ada makan-makan disediakan selepas ceramah, teman ambil kesempatan untuk betanya beberapa soalan. Teman tidak mahu bertanya secara terbuka selepas ceramah, khuatir nanti akan meletakkan Ustad kawan teman tu serba salah. Lalu teman pun ambil peluang untuk bertanya sambil makan-makan. Boleh nampak wajah ustad kawan teman itu saperti tidak selesa menyedari teman ada disitu. Lalu bermulalah dialog teman dengan Ustad kawan teman ni:
ZN : Salam Ustad, ana nak tanya adakah Ustad sudah menonton sendiri videoklip tersebut sepenuhnya, atau versi yang singkat itu?
Ust: Ana tidak gamak menengok sebab ianya haram! Malah sesiapa yang tengok itu semuanya haram dan melakukan dosa besar!
ZN: bagaimana Ustad tahu haram sedangkan Ustad tengok lagi pun tidak? Baik, ana nak tanya, kalau seorang perompak pecah masuk rumah seseorang, dan setelah merompak, dia merogol pembantu rumah orang tu, kemudian dia lari. Kebetulan rumah tersebut ada video CCTV, adakah haram bagi polis melihat video itu untuk mengecam perompak/ perogol tersebut? Adakah haram polis menyebarkan video itu dimedia cetak, elektronik dan cyber untuk mengecam perompak/ perogol itu?
UST: itu isu lain, itu satu jenayah! Sebenarnya videoklip ke, DNA ke tidak boleh dijadikan bahan bukti dimana-mana Mahkamah Syariah! (kata Ustad dengan agak meninggi suara) (Nota: teman agak terkejut dengan kenyataan ini kerana jelas memperbodoh dan memperlekeh Islam seolah-olah menolak sains & teknologi sedangkan dizaman kegemilangannyaa Islam mempelopori sains & teknologi).
ZN: dimana lainnya Ustadz? Soalnya sekarang ialah ada satu bahan bukti yang boleh mengecam siapa pelakunya, bukan perlakuan itu yang nak didedahkan! Baik, bagaimana pula kalau ada aduan menyatakan suami seseorang itu nusyuz dan mengadakan hubungan sulit dengan wanita lain. Mereka didapati pergi kesebuah hotel. Yang ada hanya bukti CCTV yang kebetulan ada didalam bilik hotel itu. Takkan tidak boleh si isteri guna video CCTV itu untuk membuktikan sumainya curang?
UST: (tak menjawab).
ZN: isunya sekarang Ustad, videoklip itu diperlukan pertama untuk mengecam dan membuktikan pelaku dan watak didalamnya, bukan membuktikan perbuatan didalamnya. Hanya setelah terbukti siapa pelakunya baru kita pergi ke peringkat selanjutnya iaitu apa yang dibuat oleh para pelaku tersebut. Apakah itu salah dan berdosa?
Ust: tapi video itu adalah rakaman video lucah! Orang sedang buat seks!
ZN: Tadi Ustad kata tidak tengok lagi, mana Ustad tahu? Jadi tidakkah penting untuk Ustad tengok dulu baru buat rumusan? Tidakkah Ustad tahu tiada siapa yang membuat tuduhan seks atau zina terhadap Anwar Ibrahim. Datuk Eskay, kawan baik Anwar sendiri, hanya menggunakan video itu untuk memberitahu rakyat bahawa kawannya Anwar tidak layak jadi pemimpin, adakah itu salah?
Ust: Tetapi video itu mendedahkan ‘aib seseorang, dan mendedahkan ‘aib seseorang itu dilarang dan adalah haram hukumnya dalam Islam (lalu Ustad membaca sepotong ayat Al quran).
ZN: kalau ada seseorang datang meminang anak perempuan Ustad, dan kebetulan ana tahu akhlak dan karektor peminang tersebut, dan kebetulan ana ada satu videoklip menunjukkan perangai peminang itu, adakah ana berdosa ana memberitahu Ustad dan menunjukkan video itu sebagai bukti keterangan ana?
Ust: itu soal peminangan, tidak ada kena mengena dengan videoklip seks ini.
ZN: tapi Anwar Ibrahim mahu “meminang” seluruh rakyat Malaysia, tidakkah seluruh rakyat Malaysia berhak mengetahui akhlak dan karektor sebenar beliau sebab mereka yang akan menentukan samada mahu menerima “pinangan” Anwar Ibrahim atau tidak?
Ust: bukan begitu caranya, banyak cara lain yang boleh dibuat!
ZN: bagaimana cara lain itu Ustad?
Ust: (tidak menjawab tetapi sebaliknya berkata) Ana rasa elok kita tangguhkan dulu sembang kita kerana para jemaah lain mungkin ada urusan lain.
(Seorang jemaah menjawab, “takpa Ustad, kami pun nak tau jugak. Kebetulan YB ada sini eloklah Ustad perjelaskan”).
ZN: ana nak sentuh isu qazaf yang Ustad sebut. Bukankah qazaf ini berlaku hanya jika seseorang menuduh tanpa bukti orang lain melakukan zina?
Ust: Ya, dan jika penuduh itu gagal membawa empat orang saksi yang cukup syaratnya penuduh itu hendaklah dihukum qazaf dengan 80 sebatan.
ZN: Tetapi didalam kes videoklip ini, Datuk Eskay atau mana-mana pihak lain tidak pernah membuat tuduhan untuk membuktikan Anwar berzina. Mereka cuma sekadar nak buktikan Anwar tidak layak menjadi seorang pemimpin umat Islam dan negara ini, dan video itu sebagai bukti. Itupun kita perlu tunggu sehingga polis mengesahkan ketulinan videoklip itu dan siapa watak-wataknya? Apakah itu juga termasuk dalam qazaf?
Ust: soalnya bukan menuduh zina, tetapi ianya videoklip menunjukkan perbuatan seks! Itu sudah cukup untuk mengujudkan qazaf! (Nota: padahal Ustad ni video tu pun tak tengok lagi!)
ZN: Adakah pendirian Ustad kalau ada wanita mengadu dirogol juga perlu membawa empat orang saksi, kalau tidak dia akan diqazaf?
Ust: Sesiapa juga yang menuduh seseorang dengan tuduhan membabitkan seks samada zina, rogol, liwat dan lain-lain, hukum Islam memerlukan empat orang saksi. Jika tidak, orang itu hendaklah dikenakan qazaf iaitu disebat!
ZN: (teman agak terkejut dengan jawapan Ustad ni) Tidakkah Ustad rasa dengan cara itu tiada wanita akan berani membuat lapuran polis mengadu dirogol! Tidakkah itu akan menggalakkan jenayah rogol, kerana para penjenayah ini akan tahu tiada siapa boleh bawak empat orang saksi. Adakah ini cara sistem keadilan Islam? Ana rasa ini bukan cara yang Islamik?
Ust: Islam lebih memelihara kehormatan seseorang, sebab itu ALLAH mewajibkan empat orang saksi (lalu Ustad membaca sepotong ayat Al Quran & satu hadis) (kemudian Ustad menceritakan mengenai tuduhan seorang wanita Yahudi terhadap anak Saidina ‘Umar).
ZN: Tapi macam mana dengan kehormatan wanita yang telah dirogol itu? Tidakkah Islam sangat menjaga kehormatan dan kemuliaan wanita, serta membela dan mempertahankan mereka? Satu lagi soalan ana nak tanya, Ustad kata adalah satu fitnah bercakap tanpa bukti. Sekarang secara terbuka Ustad menuduh Dato’ Sri Najib sebagai pembunuh Altantuya. Apa bukti yang Ustad ada?
Ust: (langsung tidak menjawab sebaliknya terus tutup majlis) Sorilah ana terpaksa pergi dulu kerana ada program lain. Assalammu’alaikum.
Begitulah secara ringkas dialog diantara teman dengan kawan teman Ustad lulusan ‘pengajian Islam ini. Tujuan teman bukan untuk mempertikaikan Ustadz kawan teman ni, sebab itu teman tidak sebut nama dan lokasi tempat dialog itu. Malah teman sangat menghormati komitmen dan dedikasi Ustad ni menyampaikan ceramah siang dan malam. Cuma teman kasihan kepada para jemaah yang kebanyakkannya tidak tahu hujung pangkal, datang dengan ikhlas untuk menimba ilmu tetapi menerima sogokan politik murahan yang teman rasa bertopengkan agama dan kitab. Dan teman kasihan kepada sahabat teman itu, yang mungkin ikhlas orangnya, tetapi dikalkatukan oleh kabus-kabus politik kepartian yang terlalu sempit. Semoga ALLAH memberikan petunjuk dan hidayah kepada kita semua.
Adios amigos, grasias senor.
Wallahua’lam & Wassalam.
Zulkifli Bin Noordin
Selasa
08 Jamadil Awal 1432
12 Apr 2011
Dear Tun,
Apology for run out of topic. What do you think about Taib, CM of sarawak. Many allegation about him mostly negative ones. How you meet him? How is he as a person?.
I agree with the general public in not having high regards for litigants suing for libel and also the courts for not awarding the sum claimed by the complainants. Let us not encourage mini-Lee Kuan Yews in Malaysia.
While some ligitants may have genuine grounds for complaint, let the Court only request the offending party to give a public apology. With no material benefits, this would automatically reduce the number of such cases filed in court to those that genuinely merit attention.
Salam buat Tun,
1. Saman menyaman ni memang kerja peguam. Lagi pun, bila lagi nak dapat publisiti murahan kat muka depan akbar pada kos yang hampir percuma.
2. Tertunggu juga nak tengok Tun disaman ratusan juta ringgit kerana buku Tun. Nakpaknya tak kesampaian lagilah.. Kurang-kurang beberapa fakta menarik bolehlah dibentangkan kat mahkamah. Sekarang ni kalau tayang video aksi panas kat luar mahkamah, boleh ditangkap.. Tapi dulu ada cerita pemandu bas yang tayang video sebegini kat penumpang, tak ada pulak peguam yang cerdik pandai mengheret pemandu berkenaan ke mahkamah.. Atau kena tengok siapa pelakonnya..?
Salam YBhg Tun,
It’s their easiest and best tactic to zip-up the mouths of their opponents. After a while their wrong doings will be forgotten.
pemimpin yg ada sekarang banyak korup dan bermasalah…kalau kerajaan nak kekal dominan perlu tukarkan kepada muka baru 70% wakil rakyat yg ada dan 95% jawatan menteri yg ada baru keyakinan rakyat akan mencapai 90% keatas yakin ngan kerajaan sekarang
http://bloginfo4uall.blogspot.com/2011/04/hidangan-ikan-patin-restoran-di.html
Dear Tun M,
If we want to talk about politicians, can we honestly the majority of them are in service for the people or rakyat?
I have always believe you are one of the rare example of a politicians who care about the people and I still do.
Unfortunately, when you retired I have lost faith in mostly all of our politicians.
My point is, it is no wonder that the matters that you highlighted are happening if we look at the type of politicians that we have?
With all the ETP,GTP, NKRA, EPP or whatever else Datuk Seri Idris Jala can come up with; one have to wonder if all of it are any use when the “drivers” ie the politicians does not even have it their gut to actually make it happen ….really happen.
Its all a vicious circle of greed.
Is there hope for the country Tun?
Dear Tun,
I am fully agree with you and also Amin Tan.
Best regards.
SALAM KASIH DAN SAYANG
AYAHANDA RAKYAT TUN
IZINKAN,
By sudin on April 11, 2011 10:48 PM
Salam Tun.
…the oppositions definitely have a field-day to take full advantage of Kapal ‘takut’ Sink’s favourite quote, the “see you in court” threat.
Salam kasih sayang Sdr. Sudin,
Izin kami tumpangkan ( copy and paste ) komen yang kami sumbangkan diblog The Scribe..
…
Sarawak PRU 10 special edition..
A KADIR JASIN said…
…
Kalau betul-betul amalkan 1Malaysia, ayuh kita berlaku adil dan seksama kepada semua tak kira bangsa, pangkat dan kedudukan..
SAMURAI MELAYU saidâ¦
Macam mana nak berlaku adil dan saksama kalau undang2 lampu trafik (hijau, kuning, merah) ada ORANG2 yang KEBAL⦠amalkan konsep 2Malaysia.. VVIP didahulukan, RAKYAT.. biasa je lak.
THE ROCKET BAR-RIS-TER may sayâ¦
” ‘KOORR’ dalam saman kalu itu MERAH lampu pun hantam jugak! ”
THE ROCKET LIM-ER-ICK may sayâ¦
“SEKSAMA ISTELI WAJIB, tapi sekalang manyak SEKSA..MA?”
Pesanan BUAT Pengundi,
Jangan dipinta ‘TSUNAMI’… huru hara DIBUATNYA nanti..
JANGAN SAMPAI MENANGIS DALAM KETAWA!
ALFATIHAH, AMIN.
Ps.â¦antara yang tersurat dan tersirat..
‘
Dearest Tun
1-The Muslim polticians in Malaysia need not have to be disturbed by all these issues.All is needed is just go sumpah their innocence in the masjid and we Muslims are quite prepared to accept this as the truth.If both parties dare to plead their innocence this way then we will leave it to Allah to decide.We must not lose sleep over this.
2-Anuar can just take this sumpah and I would have already given him the benefit of the doubt.Truly truly strange though he just can’t do this so simple thing especially now that he has two big terrible accusations standing against him.What is this joker’s problem?Doesn’t he believe in a religious solution?
3-When PRU13 comes I hope we will get rid of this pain in the ass Annuar and his colaborating wife forever.I am getting very very sick of this old man and his wife.I once sympathised with Azizah very much but the feelings now have changed 360 degrees.
4-Nonetheless in the process we should also not forget to remind Najib we do not want his wife to be too prominent.If she still want to be active then she should stand for an election for a parliamentary seat in the coming PRU.And if she wins then Najib can create a special post like an Assistant PM.Or maybe Defence Minister so that she can introduce green technology into the military.
5-I am sure UMNO can amend the constitution to make this possible.Najib I know will have no problem to get his generally kaki bodek UMNO members to agree.I am sure Rosmah will be excited too.
Thanks Tun.
SALAM BUAT TUN BERDUA MOGA DIRAHMATI ALLAH S.W.T
1) SEBAB ITULAH PERKARA YANG MELIBATKAN WANG (UMPAMA DUIT RIBA). KENAPA DI KATAKAN BEGITU ? SEBABNYA KERANA WANG BOLEH JUGA MEMBUATKAN MANUSIA SANGGUP BERBOHONG ATAU PUN FITNAH.
2) SEPATUTNYA HUKUMAN BERBENTUK WANG HANYALAH PATUT KEPADA URUSAN HUKUMAN YANG BERSANGKUTAN DENGAN WANG RINGGIT. CONTOHNYA KES ROMPAKAN WANG DAN HARTA BENDA.
3) KESALAHAN MENGENAKAN HUKUMAN YANG SEPATUTNYA SERING KALI DIDAPATI TIDAK AKAN DAPAT MENYELESAIKAN PERKARA ITU DARI BERULANG KALI.
4) BANDINGKAN HUKUMAN YANG DIKENAKAN ALLAH S.W.T DI AKHIRAT NANTI DENGAN HUKUMAN KITA CUKUP BERLAINAN. AKHIRAT LEBIH BERAT SEBAB ADANYA KEADILAN.
5) DI DUNIA KERANA KELEMAHAN KITA HUKUMANNYA TELAH TERMAKTUP DI DALAM AL-QURAN UNTUK DIGUNA PAKAI OLEH MANUSIA INI. WALAU BAGAIMANA PUN CARA HUKUMAN SETIMPAL TELAH DIPANDUKAN DENGAN SETIAP BALASAN MESTILAH BERSAMAAN DENGAN BENTUK ATAU BENDA YANG DIKENAKAN KEPADA MANGSA.
6) CONTOHNYA HUKUMAN DI JALAN RAYA SEPATUTNYA ADA HUBUNGAN DENGAN BENDA(ATAU MANUSIA) YANG TERLIBAT ATAU PERKARA BERSANGKUTAN DENGAN MANGSA.
7) KALAU WANG DIGUNAKAN SEPERTI UNTUK SAMAN KEMUNGKINAN BOLEH BERLAKUNYA UNSUR RIBA YANG DICIPTA KERANA UMUM TAHU MANUSIA TELAH MENGANGGAP WANG SESUATU YANG BERNILAI DALAM KEHIDUPAN. CONTOH WANG YANG KECIL BILA DIGANDAKAN BOLEH MEMISKINKAN MANUSIA YANG TIDAK TERLIBAT DALAM KEMALANGAN BILA SISTEM INI DIGUNAKAN SEBAGAI CARA MENGHAPUS KEMALANGAN.
8) LAJU MESTI BERSANGKUTAN DENGAN MEKANIKAL KENDERAAN YANG MESTI DI TETAPKAN HAD LAJUNYA BUKAN HUKUMAN WANG YANG AKAN DAPAT MENGURANGKAN KAKI KANAN PEMANDU MENGAWAL MENGIKUT RASA.
9) FITNAH BUKAN HUKUMANNYA DENGAN WANG SEBALIKNYA KEMUNGKINAN AKAN TERCIPTA REKAAN FITNAH BARU BILA WANG YANG BERNILAI KEPADA MANUSIA DI GUNAKAN. PERHATILAH HUKUMAN ALLAH S.W.T YANG LEBIH BERAT KEPADA BAKARAN API NERAKA.
10) HUKUMAN ALLAH S.W.T DAPAT MENGHINDARKAN MANUSIA SUPAYA PERKARA ITU TIDAK MENJALAR DARI SATU ZAMAN KE SATU ZAMAN SETERUSNYA.
WALLAHU’ALAM
Dear Tun,
I fully agree with you on this posting of political litigation. You are very observant. This political litigation you are referring to is quite a recent phenomenon pertaining to only the particular sodomy charges of a high ranking opposition figure involving himself in sordid sodomy and sexual encounters with prostitutes as reported in the newspaper. This particular politician is fiercely defended by belligerent , foul mouth, aggressive and quick witted lawyers. I am sure it would be quite intimidating for the weak hearted to fool around with these seasoned opposition lawyers. This type of litigation is a powerful weapon deployed by the opposition in Malaysia to keep criticism of their weaknesses at bay.
On the other hand, in Singapore, the reverse is true. Lee Kuan Yew and the elite government ministers deploy litigation to sue careless opposition politicians into financial bankruptcy using these litigation to humiliate, corner and eventually defeat them. Malaysian government ministers should emulate and adopt these effective weapons and tactic to counter any baseless accusations and character assassination by the opposition politicians. Just look at opposition websites. They are full of baseless accusation of government corruption. The Prime Minister should set up a powerful legal team fully funded by the treasury to sue these irresponsible opposition politicians for their blatant and baseless accusation of the government purported impropriety.
amin tan
Salam Tun,
Malaysian are not as stupid as you think they may be. Only those who revere you are. Political litigation in Malaysia depends on which side of the fence you’re on. In fact everything in Malaysia depends on it.
Dear Tun,
Well said on this topic. There are more pressing matters for our courts and judges to handle other than being rope into the dramas created by certain individual to gain his or her own political mileage.
May be next time the people can start suing the elected government for not meeting their election promises and request milions in return.
Salam Tun.
When the BAR Council is ‘demanding’ everyone to respect their “Malaysians must take note we are eternally anti-establishment” stand and is unperturbed in their belief come rain or shine, the oppositions definitely have a field-day to take full advantage of Kapal ‘takut’ Sink’s favourite quote, the “see you in court” threat.
For once, I’ll volunteer to take the lead and plead on behalf of Malaysians angered by the ‘know all & all correct’ BAR Council (the phrase below must be read in a gentle & pleading manner):
“Please BAR Council we beg of you, let’s give us one instance when you are in support of the government, just once and we’ll be with you! Please give us the opportunity to support you whole-heartedly.
“Even though your members constitute the most numerous corrupt professionals in Malaysia, we really don’t mind that because their manipulative know-how can make the smallest of technicality to a winnable position, and we feel very safe to be with you.”
In Singapura, the scenario is completely different, the ‘Raja ikan yu'(kuanyew) and his shoal/children keep demanding from their subjects,
“Tell us any lawyer who dare say ‘I am not a yes-man’ so that we can teach/show him our usual most polite & persuasive trademark (the bankruptcy) game”.
Ikan yu & his shoal can even make that cheap reporter Barry ‘the teetotaller’ Wine to kiss their _sses with a simple snap of the fingers. As expected he’ll just shut both eyes on the above matter, and also when they openly corrupted Malaysians to give them sand because Johoreans shouted at the PM moron Pak Dol not to sell sand to them!
What PAP did to Singapuraeans (the bankruptcy game) is certainly well-received and copied by that allround maniac Anwar & gang.
***p.s. 1) That Kapal ‘takut’ Sink because he can’t swim.
2) Barry Wine was jobless and begged for job from PAP.