==> Pls visit new site at http://malaysia-today.net/ <==

1.    I refer to the Star news report dated 26th May 2008 with the heading ’Salleh Abbas dares critics to call for inquiry’ and ’Ex-Gratia sort of cleared my name’.

Salleh Abbas the former Lord President said, “If anybody is not happy with my innocence, call for the Government to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate”. In reference to discussions as to why he and other judges who were dismissed in 1988 were given ex-gratia payment when two separate tribunals had found them guilty of misconduct-by lawyer Matthias Chang, the former political secretary to the then prime minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

    This comment is a follow-up to the comment made by myself dated 17th May 2008.

2.    I have clearly stated that the decisions of the two tribunals has never been reviewed, revised or set aside up-to-date. Therefore, Tun Salleh Abbas and the other judges still stand guilty of misconduct which resulted in their removal.
   
    Tun Salleh Abbas was represented by counsel/s but he defied the tribunal that was lawfully set up under the laws of the    country by boycotting it and failed to attend the hearing to defend himself. Tun Salleh Abbas therefore cannot now     claim that he is innocent.

     The challenge by him to set up a Royal Commission at this     moment of time should never ever be entertained or considered by the government on his claim of innocence for a past-prolonged matter.

    A Royal Commission will not have the judicial powers of a legally set up tribunal which has judicial trappings and is in no position to review, reverse or set aside the decision made     by the tribunal as it lacks jurisdiction to do so.

    Tun Salleh Abbas is no longer a judge in the judiciary and circumstances in time and the political environment has also change, i.e the matter is now history.

3.    Tun Salleh Abbas further states “I never lobbied for the ex-gratia payment. All these years, I have been living in my kampung for 20 years. Suddenly the government decided to resurrect me and address my innocence”.      

    The implication is that there is absolutely no doubt that PM Abdullah Badawi, Zaid Ibrahim with the tacit support of the Malaysian Bar Council collaborated and initiated this ‘sudden resurrection of innocence’. 

    The ex-gratia payment made or to be made is illegal and a bad precedent pertaining to a prolonged past of time of a matter and the side-stepping and failure to comply with the relevant laws of the country only with a sinister agenda to divert the attention of the Rakyat from the dismal performance of Barisan Nasional in the recent general elections and in particular to scandalise the reputation of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad who as prime Minster at the material time acted well within his right in the performance of his duties in accordance with the laws of the country. 

Non-partisan lawyer
Mohd Yacob Karim

Comments (14)

...
written by krising1, May 27, 2008 11:57:23

You forget one important thing: PUBLIC PERCEPTION. It was and still is that the charges were trumped up by Tun Mamak to remove Tun Salleh before some important cases came up for hearing.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 19

...
written by Hope4all, May 27, 2008 12:00:33

There will never be another royal commission of inquiry, unless it benefits the PM politically like the current RCI on the Lingam tape, which benefits him.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 9

...
written by Richy, May 27, 2008 12:01:35

A lot of factors and legalities involve in this case. For most Malaysians we would not be able to argue like lawyers in the case of Tun Salleh's. However for a government to agree ex-gratia payment to all the affected judges, there must some basis. We can assume the government had certain strong evidence to believe that the past administration was bias or there was injustice done to these judges. But if there is any party feels otherwise than the relevant people including the sacked judges should consider some form of legal redressing to straighten the records.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 10

...
written by gctham, May 27, 2008 12:05:43

"the tribunal that was lawfully set up under the laws"

yes every body also talking about laws. what laws are these, it was man make laws and interpreted by man who make the laws. when God look down, it all child play.

it was the people perception that was most important. when there is something set up to serve the purpose of somebody else, what justice can you have? attend or not you know what is the outcome. This Tun Salleh is not ordinary Tun and the Tun on the other side of the phone lah.

report abuse

disagree 1

agree 8

...
written by malsia1206, May 27, 2008 12:31:21

"... to scandalise the reputation of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad who as Prime Minister...". Are we assuming Tun had this reputation at that material time? Many thought otherwise. And more yet still do. The assumption is misconceived.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 7

...
written by tenang, May 27, 2008 12:37:27

Setting up an RCI is a good idea because it will help to shift back the rightful power to the judicial branch, an important branch of our system of politic. The RCI will likely to punish (through investigation implication) those, especially the executive branch, for robbing the power not assigned to them in the constitutions. Even though the executive leaders have changed, the RCI investigation is still relevant for asserting the separation of powers between executive, judicial, legislative, and monarchy. Many of us do not perceive mis-conducts, even if proven true, is sufficient ground for sacking the highest office judge who is in many ways representing judicial institution.

The civilized struggle, including verbal fights, among judicial and executive, however, is normal and healthy in modern democracy system. That is how the check-and-balance plays out for the benefit of the people. However, sacking highest ranking judge over such misconduct does not seem appropriate. Neither is for some countries who resort to guns and violents to subdue other branches of government is appropriate.

It is time to repair the wound of the country political system. AAB, with his weaker stage, is more attuned to the voice and demand of the people. He needs people support more than ever. He might not be altruistic in this action, but it is an action aligned with the interest of the people. The reason we want check-and-balance is precisely for that -- the leaders fight in civilized ways, and in the process, they vow for the people for support - those are the moments people can communicate what they want.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 5

...
written by Ken Liew, May 27, 2008 12:52:06

One thing is sure.... someone or some party are above the Law in this country......

Law is just a tool. But the tool of justices??? not in Boleh Land.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 6

...
written by apanama, May 27, 2008 12:58:53

kepada yacob karim and kuncu kuncu mamakpukimak seperti mati chang.
this is why the people absolutely hate bankers, lawyers, insurers etc.

dia orang suka bermain dengan kata kata. pandai sangat makbapak dia ajar bahasa putarbelit untuk menganiaya orang yand tak berdosa.

walau apapun yang kau orang nak kata atau pukar belit macam ular, satu perkara sahaja yang paling penting:

mamakpukimak anak kutty sengaja menganiaya tun salleh abas dan kehakiman kerana kegilaan kuasa yang berkobar-kobar. langsung sanggup menjahanamkan negara sejak 1988. you all can fkuc around with the validity or whatever-whatever about the tribunal. go on.

BUT THE PEOPLE KNOWS MAMAKPUKIMAK IS ZALIM. FIRAUN, and EVIL.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 13

...
written by KKchan, May 27, 2008 13:23:12

I am in favour of setting up an RCI to ferret out the truth. I am not too concerned about tarnishing the reputation of TDM or otherwise. I rather let the truth lies where it falls. By proposing the ex-gratia payment the current administration hints of innocence (Ziad said that one can apologise in many ways). And by hinting at innocence, it scandalised the Agong as an institution (the 2 tribunals were set up on his command), the foreign portion of the 2 tribunals (were their respective Governments in cahoots with TDM to bring down Tun Salleh?; that Tun Hamid should not have sat in the tribunal is always a given to me) and the Constitution (the tribunals were set up according to its provsions). If I remember correctly, both tribunals had no dissenting voice. Finally, I am just plain curious to find out what exactly happened!

report abuse

disagree 1

agree 9

...
written by MalaysiaBaru, May 27, 2008 15:03:10

Mohd Yacob Zalim!

You will BURN IN HELL together with MamakP*K*M*k and Mati Chang for all the lies you spin to deceive fellow Malaysians

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 9

...
written by joeawk, May 27, 2008 15:35:17

Why has the lawyer got to be so explicit to declare that he is non partisan.

All taken together, at that time, the tribunal ala mamak just can't be accepted as independent. No, no.

Except for a few, most Malaysians somehow believe that Tun Salleh was victimised.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 7

...
written by mgeo, May 27, 2008 16:55:54

Tun Salleh Abbas therefore cannot now claim that he is innocent.
This is moronic: even a person jailed for murder for decades may subsequently be released due to fresh evidence.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 9

...
written by rainmanpj, May 27, 2008 20:26:49

I have clearly stated that the decisions of the two tribunals has never been reviewed, revised or set aside up-to-date. Therefore, Tun Salleh Abbas and the other judges still stand guilty of misconduct which resulted in their removal.


Sorry , the legality of this two so call tribunals has yet to be established.

You did not read Datuh Seah comment. Please refute it point by point.
Then we can believe you are not bias.

AS far as I am concerned these tribunal are just monkey shows.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 6

...
written by aiyomanaboleh, May 27, 2008 23:37:59

Legally set up? He did not attend probably because he felt the tribunal was set up along the lines of a "kangaroo court".

Putting that aside, Mr Non Partisan Lawyer, don't you think it is also a oppurtunity for TDM to clear his name once and for all over all these NEGATIVE perception that he was the director of the whole episode?

I agree with KKChan, everyone just want to know what actually happened?
(KKChan, 1000 apologies for I have accidently deducted your score and reported you to the administrator)

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1