If You Don't Know The Law, Don't Talk........

Hantu Laut

If you don't know the law, don't talk!

Obviously, the defence lawyer is talking cock here and Malaysiakini talking bigger cock here.

The whole idea is to mislead Malaysians, the unthinking society.

Malaysians are easily swayed by what they read or hear.

The CJ is right here.

Malaysia is not short of half-past-six lawyers.

Illegally obtained evidence is also called "fruit of the poisoned tree"

What constitutes illegally or improperly obtained evidence?

It is a fundamental principle of English law and a requirement of the European convention of Human Rights that in a criminal trial, the prosecution bears the burden of proving the guilt of the accused. Article 6 European Convention of Human Rights requires a presumption of innocence on the accused. To prove guilt, the prosecution must obtain evidence to support their position. The prosecution may resort to improper means to gather evidence in support of their position especially if obtaining evidence in conventional ways proves unfruitful.  

Is all evidence admissible?

In criminal proceedings, all relevant evidence presented by the parties is prima facie admissible as the UK courts have adopted an inclusionary approach towards evidence in order to favour the victim and ensure a fair trial. In a case in 1861 it was confirmed evidence is admissible even if it were stolen. The rationale for this approach is that the court considers the primary aim of the justice system to be the discovery of the truth and the unearthing of guilt. This is prioritised above the protection of the accused’s right to private life. Nevertheless the courts have discretion under s.78 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 to exclude evidence which lacks relevance and which might, by its admission, endanger trial fairness. This contrasts with the exclusionary approach of the courts of the USA to illegally obtained evidence, which prioritises the need to deter the police from unconstitutional behaviour. Although the UK courts do not wish to encourage illegally methods to obtaining evidence on the part of the police, discovering guilt is prioritised. 

Real and confession evidence

Trial fairness may be endangered by the admission of unreliable evidence. English case law distinguishes between illegally obtained real and confessional evidence. Improperly obtained confession evidence, such as confessions obtained under torture contrary to article 3 ECHR, can be seen as inherently unreliable, however real evidence, although improperly obtained, such as evidence obtained through searches or covert listening devices, will remain reliable.

Our laws are mostly based on the English Law.  

Read more here.

Loyar Bodoh Pandai!

Hantu Laut

There is a limit to free speech. You can't go around insulting other religion or other race and thereafter claimed immunity under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution on the basis of free speech.

With advice like this who needs a lawyer.
This half-past-six lawyer should stop calling herself a lawyer.

Free speech does not allow you to insult other religion. Propagating hate or insulting others on the basis of race, colour and religion is a crime. Hate crime can lead to violence and death.

Though, I do not agree with the severity of the punishment, appropriate action must be taken against the couple as deterrent to others. 

Not taking action can open the floodgate of racial and religious slurs. 

Just read the many nasty racist comments on blogs and social media, one can assume that this country is not short of racists and bigots out there waiting to unleash their torrent of racial abuses.

Read here.

Pintar Sangat Atau Loyar Buruk ?

Hantu Laut

This Mohd Zain, ex-police of some kind, seemed to have fixation on Najib of wanting him to be prosecuted for this, or for that. He seems to know the law better than the best lawyer in town.

There are three things that came to my mind after reading this story in FMT. Is he dumb, seeking rough justice against Najib, or just a loyar buruk?

Obviously, there must be some lawyers out there who must have advised loser Fariz Musa in Pekan to lodge a police report on that basis....penipuan, a strong word indeed, for a minor mistake, missing out the abundantly used "Mohd"

I am not a trained lawyer (you can also call me loyar buruk) and don't know the rules here, but in many other countries including the U.S. one can sign "One And The Same Person" affidavit if there are differences or mistakes made in various documents, or the name used differ from the birth certificate.

Why would Najib want to cheat or would have gained by using different names in different documents? Isn't inadvertent omission would be more likely the case?

Below is Fariz Musa police report in Bahasa, which I thing is a waste of time and likely to be thrown out of court if it ever reached  the courtroom.

1.Saya Fariz Musa adalah calon PKR yang bertanding dikawasan Parlimen P085-Pekan menentang calon Barisan Nasional ,YAB Dato Seri Mohd.Najib bin Tun Hj.Abdul Razak dalam PRU ke-13 yang lalu.

2.Beberapa hari yang lalu saya telah membaca satu laporan dalam Freemalaysiatoday (FMT) bertarikh 17.6.2013 diatas tajuk "Usulkan undi tidak percaya terhadap Najib".

Laporan ini adalah berdasarkan surat terbuka oleh bekas Ketua Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah,Kuala Lumpur yang ditujukan kepada Ketua Umum Parti Keadilan Rakyat Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan turut disalinkan kepada Ketua Setia Usaha Negara,Peguam Negara dan Ketua Polis Negara.

3.Perkara utama dalam laporan berkenaan yang ingin saya bangkitkan ialah maklumat berkaitan DS Najib telah membuat affidavit-affidavit palsu pada 21 dan 23 September 2011 yang difailkan dalam Mahkamah, yang membicarakan kes liwat yang sekarang berada diperingkat rayuan.

4.Susulan dari itu saya telah mendapatkan salinan affidavit-affidavit berkenaan daripada Peguam PKR untuk semakan. Saya memandang berat perkara ini kerana setahu saya, membuat affidavit palsu adalah kesalahan jenayah yang serius dan sama dengan kesalahan memberi keterangan palsu di-mahkamah.

5.Saya mendapati dalam kedua-dua affidavit berkenaan, DS Najib telah membuat kenyataan secara bersumpah memberikan nama penuh beliau sebagai Najib bin Tun Hj.Abdul Razak. Isteri beliau Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor juga, ada membuat affidavit pada 21.9.2011 dan menyatakan secara bersumpah juga yang nama penuh suami beliau, ialah Najib dan bukan Mohd.Najib seperti yang saya sangka selama ini.

6.Bagaimanapun, pada hari penamaan calon pada 20.4.2013, DS Najib telah mendaftarkan nama penuh beliau sebagai Mohd.Najib dan diterima oleh Pegawai Pengurus bagi kawasan Parlimen Pekan. Nama yang DS Najib berikan dalam borang penamaan calon itu adalah bercanggah dengan nama yang beliau ikrarkan dalam affidavit beliau dan isteri beliau.

7.Saya mempunyai sebab untuk mempercayai Pengerusi SPR sendiri telah mengetahui akan perkara ini, sebelum hari penamaan calon dan boleh menjangka percanggahan berkaitan nama sebenar DS Najib, akan berlaku pada hari tersebut.Ini berikutan surat terbuka bekas Ketua Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Kuala Lumpur kepada Pengerusi SPR sendiri, memaklumkan akan kemungkinan percanggahan tersebut akan berlaku di-hari penamaan calon tersebut.

Rencana FMT bertajuk "Pencalonan Najib dalam PRU13 ditolak?" bertarikh 15.4.2013 iaitu lebih kurang 5 hari sebelum hari penamaan calon berkaitan maklumat kepada Pengerusi SPR itu, disertakan sebagai lampiran kepada laporan ini.

8.Sekiranya DS Najib atau Pegawai Pengurus SPR telah memaklumkan kepada saya atau wakil calon berkaitan percanggahan nama DS Najib dalam affidavit dan borang pencalonan beliau itu,maka sudah pasti saya akan membuat sesuatu bantahan dan akan meminta mereka merujukkan perkara tersebut ke-mahkamah dimana affidavit-affidavit berkenaan difailkan.

9.Memandangkan maklumat yang penting ini disorokkan daripada makluman saya atau wakil saya dihari penamaan calon tersebut, maka saya telah dinafikan untuk melakukan sesuatu bantahan yang pasti akan saya buat jika telah diberitahu akan maklumat ini.

Malahan saya akan membuat laporan polis terhadap DS Najib kerana membuat affidavit palsu seperti yang saya lakukan sekarang ini.

10.Saya membuat laporan polis ini adalah untuk menggesa pihak polis menyiasat Dato Seri Najib kerana dikatakan telah membuat affidavit palsu dalam perbicaraan kes liwat dan tindakan beliau menyorokkan yang beliau telah mengikrarkan affidavit dengan menggunakan nama yang berlainan dengan nama yang beliau berikan ketika mengisi borang pencalonan pada 20.4.2013.

Perbuatan menyorokkan maklumat mustahak seperti di atas boleh dikatakan sebagai perbuatan menipu.

Tujuan saya membuat laporan ini juga, untuk menggesa pihak polis menyiasat tindakan Pengerusi SPR kerana perbuatan bersubahat dengan DS Najib menyorokkan maklumat penting, iaitu mengenai pembikinan affidavit palsu dan pencanggahan antara nama dalam affidavit dan nama dalam borang pencalonan, daripada pengetahuan calon lain yang akan bertanding dan pengundi-pengundi kawasan Parlimen Pekan khasnya.

11. Bersama-sama laporan ini,saya sertakan dokumen-dokumen bukti seperti berikut;

a) Affidavit-affidavit DS Najib ikrarkan pada 21 dan 23.09.2011.

b) Affidavit Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor diikrarkan pada 21.09.2011.

c) Rencana FMT bertajuk: "Usulkan undi tidak percaya terhadap Najib." bertarikh 17.06. 2013.

d) Rencana FMT bertajuk: "Pencalonan Najib dalam PRU 13 ditolak?" bertarikh 15.04.2013.

Sekian laporan saya.

Distasteful, Imprudence And Contemptible

Hantu Laut


This kind of thing can only happen in third world countries, where third world mindset thrives and people have little self-respect. 

More often than not, those holding public offices and in politics lack continence, be it sex or power, they pay covenant to the devil.

What former Solicitor-General Yusof Zainal Abiden did is most disgusting and deserves public odium and contempt. 

Anwar, innocent or guilty, he should have exercised better discretion, stay away from him.He is only creating doubts in people's minds that he may have been double-dealing.

Even more contemptible is the exuberance expressed by Anwar Ibrahim and Pakatan leaders of this imprudence. A distasteful windfall they proudly say advantageous to Anwar, if that would be at best, an aptitude test for the former solicitor-general who had proved himself a poor and failed public prosecutor. 

Hypothetically, what do you make of a former judge or public prosecutor who become friend with a murderer whom they failed to send to prison or the gallows, not because he is innocent, but because of the prosecutor's shoddy work? 


Going by the many episodes of unconscionable politicians jumping from one riverbank to another, slamming and discrediting their former party, Malaysia's moral ground is fast slipping into the slimy gutter.....the increasing population of slimy people-pleaser.

The story here. 
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/anwar-claims-symbolic-win-after-former-prosecutor-joins-legal-team/

The Bar Council: Give Them The Lee Kuan Yew's Remedy

Hantu Laut


Yes! Start a new bar, academy of law or whatever, where lawyers are lawyers,  not loudmouth politically bias legal pariahs cooking the government's goose for the opposition.

It's as clear as day they are taking sides. 

Start a new bar council or influence members of the bar to kick out the punkish committee, the progeny of that opposition mole Ambiga Sreenevasan.


Defender of freedom and the downtrodden, my foot!


This government wasn't born yesterday.Stop fooling the people that you are lawyers, you are not, your are uncouth lawyers and politicians. 

Step into the ring if you want a fair fight.Don't shit on me under the protective cover of the Legal Profession Act


Yes! Give them the Lee Kuan Yew's remedy for their long suffering illness.


In 1988, Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew when debating the bill on the new Academy Of Law said it was his duty to put an end to politicking in professional bodies.


He said “If you want to politicise, you form your own party… you think you can be smarter than the government and outsmart it, well, if you win, you form the government. If I win, we have a new Law Society. It is as simple as that,”

Members of The Bar Council have lost  their impunity. They have shown complete indiscretion and abused of the Legal Profession Act.


Enough is enough! It's time to kick their arses!

The Bar Council Not Only Sucks, It's Unprofessional, Partial And Bias !

Hantu Laut


The Bar Council not only sucks, it's unprofessional, partial, bias and working for the oppositions.


This is what happen when you put half-past-six lawyers as leaders who lack professional ethic.


The Bar Council should have been an independent body and distant itself from politics. In almost everything it does, it seems to be giving undivided support to the opposition Pakatan Rakyat.


Bar Council Chairman Lim Chee Wee is a disgrace calling for an EGM in seeking a public apology from the Home Minister and IGP for alleged use of excessive force against Bersih protesters even before receiving full report of the investigation by Suhakam, Bar observers and an independent panel appointed by the Home Ministry.

To Members of the Malaysian Bar and pupils in chambers

We refer to Circular No 092/2012 dated 4 May 2012, giving notice of the Extraordinary General Meeting of the Malaysian Bar to be held as follows:

Date : 11 May 2012 (Friday)

Time : 3:00 pm

Venue :  Grand Ballroom, Sunway Putra Hotel (formerly known as the Legend Hotel), Sunway Putra Place, 100 Jalan Putra, 50350 Kuala Lumpur

The “Motion in relation to the events of and surrounding the BERSIH 3.0 public assembly on 28 April 2012, and matters in connection therewith, proposed by Lim Chee Wee (Chairman, Bar Council), on behalf of the Bar Council, dated 4 May 2012” (item (1) of the agenda) is reproduced below.

In accordance with sections 65(4A) and 65(4B) of the LPA, the quorum shall be 500 Members of the Malaysian Bar, and the EGM shall be dissolved if a quorum is not present by 4:00 pm. 

Members are urged to make every effort to attend the EGM so that the issues on the agenda may be effectively discussed by as many Members as possible.

We look forward to your participation and presence at the EGM on 11 May 2012.

Thank you.

Tony Woon Yeow Thong

Secretary

Malaysian Bar 

It is obvious, the Bar Council has, unashamedly, become an extension and mouthpiece of the opposition Pakatan Rakyat.They are fully aware that Anwar Ibrahim and the whole Pakatan outfit is using street politics for political expediency, yet as a professional body that should stand impartial they gave support to the abominable act of the opposition and ignore any of its wrongdoings.


Their proclivity in demonising the government in every respect clearly shows they have taken side in politics.This is not a cynical observation but a well documented factuality.


How else could he explain calling for an EGM blaming the police of brutality when many videos evidenced provocation was first started by protesters by breaking down barriers where court order has been obtained making Dataran Merdeka a "no man's land" that day.





Videos taken on that day showed the crowd attacking a police car, pelleting it with stones, shoes and whatever objects available to them which eventually sent the car out of control and the mob overturning the police car.





The Bar Council chose to ignore all these awful acts of the law breakers, instead, chose to support them,  threatening the police with legal actions.





Not all its members share the Bar Council Chairman's sentiment as evidenced by the video below.





Has the Bar Council also been hijacked by politicians and being used as their campaign machinery? 


Maybe, it's high time the Register of Societies (not sure under which jurisdiction they are registered) write a show cause letter to the Bar Council why they should not be de-registered?

NCR Land:The AG Is Right, Stupid!

Hantu Laut

A Sabahan, a federal minister, either he does not know the law, pretended not to know the law, or intentionally telling a lie to his people.Politicians playing to the gallery are nothing new, tools of the trade.

Quote:

"The natives have been here well before laws were made… It’s only when the British came here were laws made, but tribal communities have thrived pre-independence, pre-colonial days, they have thrived and developed the system of culture themselves, the Penampang member of parliament said.

“So this includes ownership of properties, of land, they developed it and for you to say there has to be a cut-off point for this is not correct because all the native laws and customs pre-date laws made by legislature,” Dompok told reporters after witnessing the presentation of printed KadazanDusun language calendars to SK Putaton here yesterday and when asked to comment on Roderic’s statement which many Sabahan leaders disagreed with the state AG." ...Unquote

Read more here.

Obviously, this leader of the Kadazan people want this state to live by the law of the jungle and trying to usurp the law of the land.Natives customary rights (NCR) are well covered in the Sabah Land Ordinance which the Honourable Minister did not bother to familiarise himself with before he concludes that the State AG was wrong.

The AG was right that after 1930 no state land can be considered as NCR land unless the complainant comply with the requirements under the Sabah Land Ordinance of which the relevant sections are shown below:

13. Enquiry as to native rights.
-------------------------------

Upon the receipt of any application for unalienated country land it shall be the duty of
the Collector to publish a notice calling upon any claimant to native customary rights in
such land who is not yet in possession of a registered documentary title to make or send
in a statement of his claim within a date to be specified in the notice. If no claim is
made the land shall be dealt with as if no such rights existed.

14. Collector to decide claims.
------------------------------

Claims to native customary rights shall be taken down in writing by the headman or by
the Collector, and shall be decided by the Collector.

15. Definition of customary rights.
------------------------------------

Native customary rights shall be held to be -
(a) land possessed by customary tenure;
(b) land planted with fruit trees, when the number of fruit trees amounts to fifty and
upwards to each hectare;
(c) isolated fruit trees, and sago, rotan, or other plants of economic value, that the
claimant can prove to the satisfaction of the Collector were planted or upkept and regularly
enjoyed by him as his personal property;
(d) grazing land that the claimant agrees to keep stocked with a sufficient number of
cattle or horses to keep down the undergrowth;
(e) land that has been cultivated or built on within three years;
(f) burial grounds or shrines;
(g) usual rights of way for men or animals from rivers, roads, or houses to any or all of
the above.

16. Procedure when rights established.
-----------------------------------------

(1) Native customary rights established under section 15 shall be dealt with either by
money compensation or by a grant of the land to the claimant and in the latter case a title
shall be issued under Part IV
(2) Where the Collector decides that native customary rights established under section 15
shall be dealt with by money compensation, the affected land together with all buildings,
erection and crops thereon shall vest in the Government free from all encumbrances and shall be deemed to have been surrendered by the lawful claimant thereof upon such decision
being made.

Every country must have established laws that organise, regulate and bring order to society. No modern nation can live on archaic laws.If one is to go by Bernard Dompok's argument that these archaic and unwritten native law must be preserved than he should also consider bringing back head-hunting to Sabah and Sarawak, a tradition that these groups of natives used to practised in the past.

Here, another ignorant journalist, if you can call this type of writing journalism, or just another highly embellished political tub-thumping to hoodwink the people, typical of many Malaysian so-called journalists, never do research or check the facts before embarking on their journey of political brickbats, serving their paymasters blindly.They should just called themselves reporters who report verbatim.

It reminds me of the reporter who think ultra vires as something insulting the dignity of the sultan that got Karpal Singh into trouble.The writer also tried to impress his readers that he is a man of letters as to quote something completely irrelevant to the subject matter as William the Conqueror proclaiming all of England as crown land, lest he forgets that Sabah and Sarawak were also known as crown land under British colonial rules.

His glossing over Article 153 of the Federal Constitution is completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with the land laws of Sabah and Sarawak which is different from the Land Laws of Peninsula Malaysia.

Sabah and Sarawak have their own Land Ordinance which supersede any Federal Land Ordinance.Lands are state controlled and Article 153 has no jurisdiction over land matters in both states.Article 153 is more on education,civil service, businesses, etc, encompassing the NEP (affirmative action for the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak)

NCR laws are not carved in stone as asserted by the minister to be in perpetuity from time immemorial.

Compliance of the law is the rule of the game and paramount to establishing whether the claimants have customary right over the land.There is no such nonsense as blanket cover of customary rights over lands in both Sabah and Sarawak as what the minister is trying to impress his supporters.

Pahang MB Is He Guilty Of Contempt Of Court ?

Hantu Laut

Are politicians and civil servants above the law? Why should they be allowed to show disrespect to our courts while ordinary Malaysians who dared to show contempt would have to face the music ?

Contempt of court usually carries imprisonment, and the same sentence, without any exception, should apply to ministers, chief ministers, menteri besar and the prime minister if they show disrespect to the court.

Read the story here , which shows without any doubt the arrogance of the Menteri Besar of Pahang, refusing to pay the plaintiff for judgement against the state government affirmed by the highest court in the country.

The Federal Court has affirmed the judgement made by the lower court.Even if the blunder was made by his predecessor the state would still have to pay the plaintiff.

The law forbids the foreclosure of state assets even if judgement has been granted against the state government.A judgement against any state government or for that matter the Federal government could just be a useless piece of paper if you don't know how to enforce it.

The Pahang Menter Besar is using this protective law to ignore the court order, or the state government has no money to pay up, which is most unlikely, as the state can always seek help of the Federal government.

I sympathise with the plaintiff, he must be at his wits end on what to do next, so much so, he is barking up the wrong tree, asking the Prime Minister to intervene. Najib can only mediate, he can't enforce the court order, only the court can do so.

The plaintiff should go back to the court and cite the Menteri Besar for contempt and if he still refused to pay, the court, I'll be surprised, if he is not thrown in prison.

You can't get the state assets but you can get the Menteri Besar.

That was my two pennies worth of advice.

Question For The Lawyers: Letter Of The Law or Spirit Of The Law ?

Hantu Laut

The United Kingdom has no codified constitution.Much of the British constitution is embodied in the written form, within statutes, court judgments and treaties and in other unwritten sources such as, constitutional convention and royal prerogatives.

Unlike Malaysia and most other countries of the world the U.K has no written constitution. She ran by convention. In layman's term it means " a way in which something is usually done".

Can we say the U.K has no constitution whatsoever?

Here, a lawyer, a so called constitutional expert and a member of the Bar Council and who has probably wasted a couple of years at law school says Malaysia has no official religion because the word "official" is missing from Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution in which Islam was prescribed as the state's religion.

Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution, should it be "letter of the law or spirit of the law"? A question for the legal fraternity.

Are lawyers trained to differentiate between the two or were just taught to parrot everything they learned from the law book.

On the other hand, we have dummies who says the prime minister of Malaysia must be a Muslim and a Malay.These dummies probably do not have a copy or have never seen a copy of the Malaysian constitution, let alone read it, but got enough balls to go to the press and say their piece.

Malaysia has a written constitution.We are not governed by convention.Just because historically we had only Malay/Muslim prime ministers it does not mean that is the law of the land.Person of any faith can become prime minister if he enjoyed majority support in Parliament.However, such anomaly is not likely to happen in the near future.

Of course, there are smart lawyers and and not so smart lawyers.

They say, smart lawyers go into private practice and make lots of money and the not so smart lawyers joined politics and make even more money than the smart lawyers.The worst of the lot are bad lawyers, those pretty useless ones in private practice, wanting to keep up with the Joneses but can ill afford it, next thing you know they were doing shady deals and some would run away with their client's money.

So, not all lawyers are smart.

Abraham Lincoln, a self-educated man, who became a lawyer and went on to become the 16th President of the United States said in one of his famous speeches "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt"

Letter Of The Law Versus Spirit Of The Law?

Hantu Laut

In my posting here and here I am of the opinion that Tian Chua automatically loses his MP seat and a by-election should be called.

Shouldn't the judge be more concerned with spirit of the law?

I stand with you Karpal.You are the only one honest enough to interpret the law as it is.

This is no "Catch 22" situation.

It's a goof-up and somebody might as well admit it.

Which Come First The Law Or The Judge's Intention ?

Hantu Laut

There would be no need for a by-election as the judge is very clear in what he says.He doesn't want another by-election.

Than! why not fine him below RM2000?

Below is the relevant section of the Penal Code that Tian Chua is charged with.

Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty.

332. Whoever voluntarily causes hurt to any person being a
public servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant,
or with intent to prevent or deter that person or any other public
servant from discharging his duty as such public servant, or in
consequence of anything done or attempted to be done by that
person in the lawful discharge of his duty as such public servant,
shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend
to three years or with fine or with both.

Do you see any minimum fine stated therein.I believe, the amount is at the judge's discretion.

Tian Chua a happy man.The BN happier still. There is no need for the BN to fight another by-election which in all likelihood they will lose.The only unhappy people are the leaders in Pakatan Rakyat.Can't show off their rising popularity.

So, which is supreme, the law or the judge's intention?

I am confused!

Gutter Politicians,Scumbags And Half-Past Six Lawyers

Hantu Laut

If  Darth Vader has the order of the 'Sith', Anwar now has the order of the SD (Statutory Declaration), a new ill- founded weapon specially designed to attack Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, implicating him in the murder of the sultry Mongolian model.This is the 2nd SD after Raja Petra's equally explosive bombshell.

On the other side of the fence the story of  saving a victim from the trauma of being sodomised was equally bizarre.

Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has finally revealed that the victim purportedly sodomised by Anwar came to his house as he was too traumatised.The DPM opened his doors and opened his heart to console him.

The good news, now Malaysians who felt traumatised can go to the DPM's house to be consoled.All Malaysian are welcome to take this opportunity if they can get pass the security guards manning the entrance to his house.

Strangely, the victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari instead of going directly to a police station to lodge a report chose to go to the DPM's house first and only reported the case 2 days after the incident.The said victim had also been seen and photographed visiting the DPM's office some months ago purportedly to apply for a scholarship.

Coming back to the ill-conceived idea of using SD to swear evidence based on hearsay, I wonder if the lawyer concerned had warned the person making the declaration  the risk involved and the penalty for making false evidence under the Act. Either he has not or the reward offered was too tempting to refuse in spite of the risk.

 

Below are my compilation of the Statutory Declaration Act and the Penal Code (Act 574):

This Act may be cited as the Statutory Declarations Act 1960.

False declarations punishable under the Penal Code.

3.Declarations made by virtue of provisions of this Act shall be deemed to be such declarations as are

refereed to Sections 199 and 200 of the Penal Code(Act 574)

Below are the relevant sections of the Penal Code.

199.False statement made in any declaration which is by law receivable as evidence.

Whoever, in any declaration made or subscribed by him, which declaration any Court, or any public servant or other person, is bound or authorised by law to receive as evidence of any fact, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, touching any point material to the object for which the declaration is made or used, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.

200.Using as true any such declaration known to be false.

Whoever corruptly uses or attempts to use as true any such declaration knowing the same to be false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.

Below are punishments for giving false evidence:

194.Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of a capital offence.

Whoever gives or fabricates false evidence, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, any person to be convicted of an offence which is capital by the law for the time being in force in Malaysia, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to twenty years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if an innocent person be convicted and executed in consequence of such false evidence, the person who gives such false evidence shall be punished either with death or the punishment hereinbefore described.

195.Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of an offence punishable with imprisonment.

Whoever gives or fabricates false evidence, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, any person to be convicted of an offence which by this Code is not capital, but punishable with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a term of seven years or upwards, shall be punished as a person convicted of that offence would be liable to be punished.

Ex-policeman P.Subramaniam would have to face the music under this section of the Penal Code.His retraction of the 1st SD and replaced by a 2nd SD had made the matter worse for him.He had actually confirmed he lied under oath and incriminated himself.He should not have changed his mind, he did because he knew it was a lie.Another irresponsible lawyer giving wrong advice.

Lying to implicate someone of murder is a serious crime which carry the same sentence as murder itself.Anwar and his half-past-six lawyers should take responsibility if this man goes to prison.

Meanwhile,lawyer Datuk Hazman Ahmad, a defence lawyer for one of the accused in the murder case said Balasubramaniam had the right to substitute his previous SD with a new one.So, Bala what are you waiting for, you can produce a dozen or so more SD according to this lawyer.

Wow! What's happening to the state of our legal profession, you get lawyer giving this kind of advice.

Another rather interestingly ignorant statement came from the President of GPMS Datuk Reezal Merican who said a review must be done to prevent people from using sworn statement to slander others and the law must spell out punishment on those who made false declarations.

Another one of those who thinks he is making a smart statement when the law is already in existence to deal with such matters.Hiya! my friend, learn how to read and do your homework first before you go out and embarrass yourself. 

Meanwhile, the lawyer Americk Singh who drafted the SD for Balasubramaniam said he believes Bala was telling the truth and could have been intimidated to change his story.

Maybe,it's the fish head curry he had with ASP Tony that was probably laced with the truth drug that knocked some sense out of him.

While Najib and Anwar are at each other's throat, Abdullah stands out sitting pretty.

Malaysian politics have gone dodgy and dirty.

Gone to the dogs ! 

Read:

Wong Chun Wai's 'Sick,tired and fed up'

Marina Mahathir's 'I think I'll go on strike'

SORE LOSERS AND BAD WINNERS

Hantu Laut

There are winners and losers in every type of competition.The worst kinds are the sore losers and bad winners.

Those who loses in a fair competition but whines about it on a constant basis, blaming everyone around them for their loss except themselves, who can't simply be honorable, by accepting defeat and/or trying again and who can't take a loss in stride.

The UMNO lots should take a leaf from the books of Gerakan's Koh Tsu Koon and MCA's Ong Kah Ting instead of moaning and whining about their losses. Both Koh and Ong have been admirable and should be emulated by others.

Courage in the face of adversity is not common attributes in many men. Only those with high sense of self-respect and unquestionable integrity possess it. The weak and corrupt will find all kind of excuses to defend themselves and blame others for their failure.

Gerakan's Koh has shown admirable manly manner and correct social etiquette by attending the swearing in of the new chief minister from the opposition party.MCA's Ong has taken full responsibility for his party massive loss by not accepting any offer of ministerial post even though he won his seat.

Many in UMNO and other component parties have not shown exemplary behaviour.Even those who have lost are still lobbying for positions. The only exception is Sharizat, she took her defeat graciously.She deserved respect and should be given a respectable position.

In the Sabah BN lobbying for positions is intense among the components. LDP, whom many Sabahans have given zero seat, had won all their seats and are now making demands for a full minister and an assistant minister. Its President V.K.Liew said "In making our representations (at the BN Supreme Council ) we informed that though we are young we are qualified and our elected representatives most importantly are God-fearing, honest and dedicated"

As the American would say, what a lot of baloney ! Instead of beating your own drum, let others judge you. God-fearing, honest and dedicated do not come with divine guarantee.

Worse still, Liew in spite of the help of postal votes won on a wafer thin majority of 176 votes for the Sandakan parliamentary seat and the 2 state seats of Merotai and Tanjong Kapur were UMNO seats given on the platter, not exactly a position to be proud of to make open demands.

In April 1977 the then President of LDP Tan Sri Chong Kah Kiat resigned from all his ministerial posts due to irreconcilable differences with Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman on the Mazu controversy. He said the action taken by Musa Aman has angered the Chinese community.

Below is a posting by Jeff Ooi in his blog, Screenshot

Political bombshell explodes in Sabah... ( 4 )

"This is not a matter of quarrel (subsequent to the Prime Minister's remark that angered the Liberal Democratic Party)... this is a Barisan Nasional problem. The PM has offended the Chinese and the Sabahan... he has hurt my self-respect."

Three days after tendering his resignation as the deputy chief minister of Sabah citing 'political principles', Chong Kah Kiat surfaced yesterday to give Oriental Daily News an exclusive interview.

"Not only LDP (is unhappy), the rakyat in Sabah also (are unhappy)... he (the PM) had made such a remark about a Chinese leader, the impression of him in the eyes of the Sabahan, especially the Chinese in Sabah, will be negative," reports Oriental Daily in the Page 3 lead today.

Chong said the PM has offended the Chinese in Sabah. "I am not important, but I do have my self-respect."

On the day of his resignation, Chong prided himself as a BN man for 30 years without switching party, and had stood steadfast in helping BN find a stronghold in the state.

PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, however, remarked that Chong's exit is 'not really a loss'. "Let him rest," the PM reportedly said.

Meanwhile, several non-governmental organisations (NGOs) expressed sadness over Chong's sudden resignation, reports Daily Express.

The popular Sabah daily describes Chong as the only leader from the Berjaya government (1976-1985) who has managed to survive the tumultuous years of Sabah politics punctuated by multiple party-hopping.

The results of the just concluded general election tell a different story.The Chinese community could have given all their votes to DAP candidates by ignoring the PKR candidates if they really don't want to support the state government. Their actions proved otherwise.

In a worst case scenario Sabah BN was expected to lose 3 parliamentary and 7 state seats still giving it a comfortable majority.

It is obvious the Chinese and Indians in Peninsula are more angry with the BN government rather than those in Sabah.

Jeff Ooi is now DAP Member of Parliament for Jelutong.

Correct,Correct,Correct

Hantu Laut

"Correct,correct,correct" and now it's "Looks like me, sounds like me".

Can you get anyone with worse antics than this slithering sycophant,a Mr Tag Along and a denizen of the legal fraternity with a magic wand that can influence the appointment of judges.He was so powerful he can actually tell the ex-Prime Minister who to appoint to the bench.

In the controversial video tape he described the ex-PM as "Being the old man, he is 76 years old, he gets whispers everywhere, and then you don’t whisper, he get taken away by the other side. But, now the PM is very alert he because every time he gets letters from Tan Sri Dzaiddin, he calls Tengku Adnan, he says discuss with Vincent, come and discuss".

Who is Vincent? Was he a special rapporteur officially appointed by the government to advise the ex-PM on appointment of judges?

If what he said about the ex-PM was true, than it is most disgraceful and a shocking news to the nation.Judges are appointed to dispense justice to all and sundry and not to be subservient to anyone in particular.Judges have no masters,they are masters of their own .They are expected to adhere to the rules of justice and listen to their conscience, not to anyone else including the Prime Minister.

Was Vincent Tan a close confidant of the ex-PM? It looked obviously so, if we go by what that bragging power brokering creep revealed in the video.For the ex-PM to tell Tengku Adnan to discuss state matters of the highest importance with a man who has nothing to do with matters of government, one can only assume such relationship did exist, unless, that slimy bragging creep was name-dropping just to impress his audience.

It was no coincidence that in 1993, Lingam was Vincent Tan's lawyer in a law suit against M.G.G.Pillai, a journalist who has since died.Tan brought a defamation suit against him and was awarded a substantial amount, unprecedented in the legal history of defamation suits in this country.It was also no coincidence that the damages awarded by the Federal Court was presided over by a team of judges headed by Eusoffe Chin.

In the latest episode, the 'Correct,Correct,Correct' and 'Looks like me,Sounds like me' has manifested into 'I cannot recollect'.

He told the commission."Without looking at the video, I cannot recollect the occasion. After looking at the video, I do not recollect. It has happened so long ago. Looking at the video, there is bottles of wine, whiskey or brandy and 7-Up. I would have had one too many drinks. That was a drinking session, a celebration, a party. I must have had one too many (and) it is more than six years ago. I cannot remember".

"It looks like me. You can ask the question 100 times, I will still give you the same answer".He must have assumed every members of the commission are idiots, to be able to take this kind of crap coming from him, a man void of any dignity and shame.

This legal clown has turned the commission into a circus and tried to fool everyone with intoxicated lapse of memory as his excuse not to remember whom he spoke to on the phone.

This fool and his folly will eventually put a noose around his own neck.A shameless and stinking piece of crap,undignified and fits for the sewer.

Is this the kind of man some of our judges and leaders kept company with?

LATEST FROM LINGAM'S COURTROOM ANTICS.

Now he admits being a bullshitter and a braggart.He is king in his own house and can talk whatever rubbish he wishes.Below are some of his oratorical skills.

1.“I can choose whatever topic I like. I can even pretend to talk to President Bush if I like,”

2.“That (conversation) was in my house. That was in the privacy of my room. My house is my castle. I am the king there. I can talk whatever rubbish in my house as long as I don’t get drunk outside and misbehave,”

3.“Even if I did say it and I am sorry to use this word but I was bullshitting and bragging,”

4.“No, no, no, my learned commissioner, you didn’t get me right. I said it looks like me, it sounds like me. I didn’t said it’s not me. I don’t want to say it’s 100 percent me because the authenticity of the clip has to be established,”

5.“The tickets are separate tickets with separate number. They were just stapled together and anybody can staple them [...] I don’t know who did it, I have not seen it, you have to call the maker who did it,”

6.“I changed my prepaid numbers very often when I lost my mobile phone. I also change my house phone number very often because there are many prank calls to me and my maid at late hours,”

Read Sophie's World anecdotal story on this.

PROCRASTINATING JUDGES

HANTU LAUT

Procrastination: The intentional and habitual postponement of an important task that should be done now.Chronic procrastination maybe a sign of an underlying psychological or physiological disorder.

The Court of Appeal registry's record revealed that a former High Court judge did not write grounds of judgement in 33 criminal and civil cases. The judge concerned has since been promoted to the Federal Court. In two of his cases, the prisoners were languishing in death row for almost ten years due to his failure to provide ground of judgement, in the absence of which, the accused couldn't make an appeal to a higher court.

As usual and in true Malaysian style of living in denial and false sense of infallibility, the Chief Justice of The Federal Court,Tun Ahmad Fairuz asked for proof that he had elevated undeserving judges.

Maybe, those seemingly busy, overworked and procrastinating judges should delegate the writing of grounds of judgement to their underlings.

NINJA IN THE COURTHOUSE OR WAS IT DARTH VADER ?

HANTU LAUT

Why did the two policemen cover their faces ? Are they hiding their faces from the public for a reason ? Why hide your face if you are going to prison for the rest of your life or probably would be sent to the gallows.Why can't they stand up like a man, like Razak Beginda, and walk like a man ? Has it something to do will the level of education ? I really have no answer to this, maybe, someone out there, somewhere, could tell me.

I believe the photo was taken outside the courtroom.Has anybody any idea whether the two cops were also allowed to do the same inside the courtroom ? I am sure some of the famous bloggers in Kuala Lumpur would have attended the court trials and would probably know the situation better.

Below is a photo of Darth Vader, the devilish monster from the dark side, Dark Lord of the Sith.