Malaysian Judge Ian Chin
All is not quiet on the fronts - the Executive (protest on rotten fuel hike is continuing, Petronas might have a blow-off), PR is maintaing pressure on political front, and Ian Chin had thrown the gauntlet and the latest---report Mahathir to the Police for criminal defamation.
There's another battle going on. Pak Lah blames bloggers. Some bloggers are still on some kind of strike, which should please the PM and others.
That's life and it must go on!
I'm looking forward to a full disclosure on Petronas' Financial Report, and nothing less. We can count on those very able people who dig the bowels of our motherland!
War of words continues
SIBU: The war of words between judge Datuk Ian Chin (pictured above) and former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad continues.
In his latest move, Chin said he had asked the High Court deputy registrar here to lodge a police report against Dr Mahathir for comments made on his blog.
Upon resumption of the hearing of the election petition for the Sarikei parliamentary seat at the High Court here beginning yesterday, Chin said a police report should be lodged against Dr Mahathir for criminal defamation under Section 499 of the Penal Code.
In his nine-page statement delivered in court yesterday, Chin said Dr Mahathir had claimed that he (Chin) had exacted revenge in the judgments of two cases in 1999 because of the detention of his father and brother.
He said because of the two cases, he had been accused of impropriety.
In the first case, Sabah Foundation and its company (SF) sued Datuk Syed Kechik and a company called Banita, asking him to account for the profits in respect of a special timber licence because Syed Kechik had acted fraudulently and dishonestly and in breach of his fiduciary duty as the director of Sabah Foundation and as managing director of Seranum when that special timber licence went to Banita.
SF sued Banita to have Banita declared as trustees for SF concerning the licence.
Chin allowed the claim amounting to RM29,467,915 with costs to the plaintiff.
In the second case, it was also a claim by SF with two of its companies against Syed Kechik for an account of the profit resulting from the enhancement of lands owned by the company called Zara.
The appellate court reversed Chin’s decision in that case.
Chin said that in the first case, “It was never the argument before the Court of Appeal or before the Federal Court that my judgment was tainted by any impropriety on my part or by reason of the detention of my father and brother or by reason of my exacting a revenge on account of those detentions.”
In the second case, although his decision was reversed, Chin said the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court had never said the three factors were grounds for the reversal.
He said when a High Court judge erred or misdirected himself in his decision there was the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court to take care of things.
He said the two cases were especially difficult because of the thousands of pages of documents and hundreds of pages of notes of proceedings that he had to go through while writing the judgment for delivery on Sept 6, 1999 after hearing the case from February to April.
He said during that time, he had to hear four other cases and deliver the judgments as well.
“Mistakes in my decisions had occurred before and will occur in future as I am not infallible.
“But to suggest, as Dr Mahathir had, that I have erred in the two cases because I exacted revenge, something which the litigants themselves did not even put forth to the Court of Appeal or to the Federal Court, would be to lie.”
He said if the Federal Court had said that he (Chin) had acted improperly to exact revenge, “I would definitely resign, but they have not. From what I have said, it is obvious that the devil’s advocates are at work trying to give a spin to the judgment of the Federal Court …”
He said he had also been accused of making disclosures in the current election petition hearing because Dr Mahathir had blocked his (Chin’s) promotion.
“This has been shown to be untrue. Let me say it again, whatever I have done and whatever judgments I have handed down can withstand public scrutiny, but, not in the sense that I was not and will not be wrong in the judgments, but, that I have acted in accordance with the law and the evidence before me.
“Let me also say, let the law take its course in respect of whatever allegations that have been made against me; I will let my judgments speak for me. So do not lose your forecast as to what I have said about the judiciary, or else, what I have done will come to naught.”
Chin made this statement in the court yesterday when he asked the counsels whether they were confident in him to proceed with the election petition.
The counsels expressed full confidence in him, and the election petition proceeded as planned.
Hearing continues today.
The Borneo Post
Previous related posts on same subject:
-->Mahathir's turn
-->Bila ayam balik kampung
No comments:
Post a Comment