 | | | | ||||
|  [
Index
] | ||||||
 | |||||||
| | | | | |||
We Have Presented A Motion In Parliament To Debate The Need To Have A Commssion Of Enquiry On The Judiciary A comment by Dr Tan Seng Giaw, DAP National Vice-Chairman and MP for Kepong on what the Democratic Action Party, DAP, is trying to do in Parliament concerning the conundrum of judiciary independence. 23 June 2000 | |||||||
| On 10 July 2000, DAP will present a motion in the Malaysian Parliament to debate the need to form a commission of enquiry to restore public confidence in the independence, integrity, impartiality, transparency, efficiency and accountability of the judiciary. It will also ask for an enquiry into the photographs depicting the Malaysian Chief Justice Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin having a holiday with a defence lawyer Datuk Lingam. The holiday photographs of Tun Eusoffe Chin and Datuk Lingam were said to have been taken in December 1994. The former said this month that he paid for his own trip. But some maintain that the latter foot the bills. In an independent judiciary which is manifestly seen to be just, a judge having a holiday with a defence lawyer may be construed as improper. Last month, the media reported the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Dr Rais Yatim as saying the same thing about the photographs. Was the media carrying the truth? A commission of enquiry can investigate. The Malayisan Bar Council is trying to have an Extraordinary General Meeting, EGM, to pass, among other things, a motion asking for a tribunal according to Article 125 (3) & (4) of the Federal Constitution. On 21 June 2000, Judge Datuk Dr R K Nathan ordered the council president Sulaiman Abdullah to show cause why he should not be cited for contempt of court. Sulaiman was alleged to have suggested | |
that Nathan stood to gain some interest because his son is a member of the Malaysian Bar. Nathan discharged him after hearing submissions by counsel for both parties. Lawyer Raja Segaran seeks an injunction to stop the EGM, filing an application against the Malaysian Bar and 11 others. On 22 June 2000, Nathan issued an order to ban the EGM on 24 June 2000. He pronounced that there was no basis to the EGM: the Bar did not write to Rais first to verify if the latter had actually made allegations against Eusoff. What actually happened between Eusoff and Lingam in New Zealand as recorded by the photographs? What did Rais say in May in Melbourne about the matter? What are the basic rules practised in Malaysian courts? In his 15-page judgement at 4.15 pm yesterday, Nathan said: "If the Bar is not concerned with the truth but wants to have this meeting (EGM) only to satiate thier hunger for a public debate over the Chief Justice by wrestling the discussion from the genral public, and by so doing trying to show that they are protecting the sanctity of the judiciary, it seems to me that this effort is totally misconceived." What are the ways to get to the truth? One way is to set up a commission of enquiry to look into all aspects of the matter. Once an independent enquiry arrives at the truth, Malaysians will perceive the judiciary in that light. Truth needs not many words.
Dr Tan Seng Giaw | |||||
| | | | | ||||
 | | |||||||
| [ Home | Political | Medical | Personal ] | Article #207 | |||||||
| [ Recent | Archives | Forum | Feedback ] | [
Index
]
| | | | |
| | ||
