So the man who established Umno Baru in 1988 quits the party he founded in a huff. Now this comes just a few days after he and a string of his cronies were accused of involvement in the fixing of appointments of judges, says Anil Netto.
It is troubling to read the Prime Minister’s view on the Lingam Tape Report with regard to whether it would be made public or not. In responding to this question, he had said, “I want to see what is inside, what is being said and examine it in details before deciding.”
This means he has an option either to make the Report public or deny the people access to its contents. This option is not acceptable to civil society.
Aliran is happy to note that the Lingam Tape Report has been finally concluded and the Report submitted to His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
But Aliran is perturbed that there is no indication that the Report will be made public. It is our considered view that the public is entitled to have access to the Lingam Tape Report. We demand that this Report be made public.
Royal Commission of Inquiry into a video clip that implied interference
in senior judicial appointments in Malaysia is threatening to hold in
contempt a human rights organisation and an opposition leader over
their criticisms about the ongoing hearing.
The South East Asian Press Alliance (Seapa)
shares the concern of its local partner, the Centre for Independent
Journalism, who said the Commission’s narrow view of "contempt"
potentially violates freedom of expression, as guaranteed under Article
10 of the Constitution.
Five lawyers staged a walkout after the royal commission into the Lingam tape today barred their client – PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim – from participating in the proceedings.
commission’s decision was made due to the Anwar’s refusal to withdraw
and apologise for his contemptuous remarks made against the royal panel
Also barred for the same reason is social reform movement Aliran.
The Centre for Independent Journalism is concerned that the Royal
Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam video clip (Commission of Inquiry
on the Video Clip Recording of Images of a Person Purported to be an
Advocate and Solicitor Speaking on the Telephone on Matters Regarding
the Appointment of Judges) is taking a narrow view of ‘contempt of
court’, in a way which potentially violates freedom of expression, as
guaranteed under Article 10 of the Malaysian Constitution.
CIJ expresses its disappointment with the Royal Commission’s view on
two articles – a press statement issued by Aliran and an article
written by Anwar Ibrahim – as contempt of the Commission.
M Puravalen and CV Prabhakaran said at the outset of the inquiry this
morning that their clients stood by their statements which had
criticised the commission’s decision not to call Anwar and two other
party leaders as witnesses.
(The Star) KUALA LUMPUR: Non-governmental organisation Aliran and Parti
Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim are on the “verge of
contempt” over online articles questioning the integrity of the Royal
Commission of Inquiry.
Commissioner Datuk Mahadev Shankar cited the articles as Lingam Inquiry: Aliran is Shocked and Devastated and another entitled ‘Unseen Hand’ Manipulating the Inquiry.
The decision of the Royal Commission of
Inquiry not to call Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim comes as a great shock.
We are devastated by this absurd decision by a body that has been
entrusted to seek the truth and defend justice. It is absolutely
clear that this commission is not capable of seeking the truth or
It is not only Anwar but all the others
associated with him – R Sivarasa, Sim Tze Tsin and two other secret
witness – were excluded from coming forward to give evidence
and shed light on areas that were unclear and cloudy.
What are we focusing on in this issue? Correct! Correct! Correct! It’s the explosive Lingam video clip and the impact it has had on Malaysian society.
In our cover story, P Ramakrishnan asserts that everything that could go wrong with the judiciary has gone wrong. The only way to redeem the judiciary, he argues, is to appoint a royal commission of inquiry with broad powers to look into all that ails the bench.
De facto law minister Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz owes the nation an apology. He had misled the nation by claiming the existence of a “Witness Protection Bill”, when no such Bill exists. It is really shocking that the minister in charge of law should be so ignorant in matters of the law but is so loud in his views in making reference to a non-existing Bill
Aliran calls upon the ACA to stop harassing people who come forward in the national interest to provide incriminating evidence in an attempt to expose corruption in high places. This was what R Sivarasa did when he made a report to the ACA. His action must be deemed as a citizen’s national service. It must be viewed as a patriotic duty. Sivarasa’s action must be commended.