Lingam tapes

[qba437]

1. The NST reported that the Lingam case is closed. He will not be persecuted (or prosecuted).

2. He must be feeling very relieved. But what about the Commission's report on his influence over me in the selection of judges?

3. I was waiting for my day in court so I can defend myself. I have a lot of things to say about attempts to influence me on the appointments of judges.

4. Now that Lingam has no case to answer, how does it affect my being accused of being influenced by him, remembering that the tape was about his alleged phone conversation with other individuals. Did he say that I asked him to speak to those people? Was my name involved in his phone call?

5. These questions will remain in the minds of the people who read the conclusion of the Commission. So what now?

6. For some time during the past regime I was told that a thorough search was made to find instances where I abused power or accepted illegal gratification while in office. Apparently nothing was found.

7. Could it be that one way of getting at me was to accuse me of being influenced by Lingam in my choice of judges?

 

[WangEmas]

translate please..

 

[Sony_Boy]

1. Yang NST lingam melaporkan bahawa kes ini ditutup. Dia tidak akan dianiaya (atau dituntut).

2. Dia pasti merasa sangat lega. Tapi bagaimana dengan laporan Suruhanjaya tentang pengaruh atas saya dalam seleksi hakim?

3. Aku sedang menunggu hari saya di mahkamah supaya aku bisa membela diri. Aku punya banyak hal untuk mengatakan tentang upaya untuk mempengaruhi saya tentang janji hakim.

4. Sekarang lingam tidak mempunyai kes untuk menjawab, bagaimana pengaruhnya terhadap dituduh terpengaruh olehnya, mengingati bahawa rakaman itu tentang dugaan perbualan telefon dengan orang lain. Adakah dia mengatakan bahawa saya memintanya untuk berbicara kepada orang-orang? Adakah nama saya terlibat dalam telefon?

5. Soalan-soalan ini akan tetap dalam fikiran orang-orang yang membaca kesimpulan Suruhanjaya. Jadi apa sekarang?

6. Untuk beberapa waktu selama rejim Saya diberitahu bahawa carian menyeluruh dilakukan untuk menemukan contoh-contoh di mana aku diseksa haram kuasa atau diterima kepuasan sementara di kantor. Rupanya tidak ada yang ditemui.

7. Mungkinkah salah satu cara untuk mendapatkan pada saya adalah menuduh saya terpengaruh oleh lingam dalam pilihan saya hakim?

)))

 

[eapui]

google translate x betoi lo ayat berbelit belit mcm lingam..))

 

[shane]

Nazri bohong kata tiada saksi

Hazayani Zakaria

KUALA LUMPUR, 10 Nov: Kenyataan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz di Dewan Rakyat semalam bahawa siasatan terhadap kes Datuk V.K Lingam terpaksa ditutup kerana tidak ada saksi telah dibidas dan disanggah.

Bidasan kenyataan itu telah dibuat oleh salah seorang saksi penting, dalam kes video terbabit, Jayanthi L.G Naidu yang hadir ke parlimen hari ini bagi menjelaskan perkara itu.

Beliau juga merupakan bekas setiausaha Lingam dan pernah terbabit dalam menguruskan perbelanjaan percutian VK Lingam dan mengagihkan sejumlah wang kepada hakim tertentu.

R. Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) dalam satu sidang media bersama Jayanthi di lobi parlimen tengahari tadi berkata, jawapan Nazri itu langsung tidak munasabah malah beliau sendiri mempunyai bukti yang kukuh berhubung percutian Lingam, dan bekas Ketua Hakim Negara, Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin pada tahun 1994.

Menurutnya, beliau sendiri ketika itu membuat tempahan tiket untuk Lingam, Eusoff Chin serta keluarga masing-masing dan menguruskan bayaran untuk perjalanan mereka.

Beliau turut mengakui pernah mengeluarkan sejumlah wang bernilai RM 100, 000 hingga RM300, 000 untuk diberikan kepada hakim yang terlibat.

Sementara itu Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) dalam sidang media yang sama menegaskan meskipun Nazri mengatakan Lingam tidak melanggar sebarang undang-undang kerana melobi pelantikan hakim, namun tindakan Lingam jelas merosakkan institusi kehakiman.

"Mungkin dari sudut akta dan undang-undang betul tapi dalam suasana negara sangat-sangat berhajatkan untuk membaik pulih institusi kehakiman yang telah reput maka apa jua tindakan yang ditanggapi sebagai merosakkan lagi institusi kehakiman ini adalah salah," tegasnya.

 

[shane]

Ni saksi yg kerja ngan Lingam cerita....

Statement by Ms. Jayanthi L.G Naidu, former secretary of Datuk VK Lingam

10 November 2009
I had heard in the media the announcement by Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz that the MACC had cleared Datuk VK Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin of any wrong doing or corruption, I also read that the MACC had closed the case on the investigation into the New Zealand holiday taken together by Datuk VK Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin in 1994 because they could not locate a key witness.

As for the inability to locate a key witness as alleged, I have been contactable at all times. The ACA/MACC officers have at all times been able to contact me earlier for my statements. After the press announcement by Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz reported on 23.10.09, I called the MACC and asked who was the key witness that they were looking for. They were unable to answer me.

I gave a full statement in 1998 regarding this New Zealand trip to the former ACA ( now the MACC ), some of which I repeated in the Royal Commission proceedings. After the Royal Commission proceedings, I gave another statement to the MACC in the presence of my lawyer En Amer Hamzah Arshad. Amongst the matters I told the ACA/,MACC and the Royal Commission were that VK Lingam and Eusoff Chin and families’ holiday trip to New Zealand in 1994 was planned and paid for by VK Lingam. On the instruction of VK Lingam, I had assisted to book and pay for their air tickets in accordance with their itinerary. The documents and holiday photographs have all been given to the ACA and the Royal Commission.

In my evidence before the Royal Commission, I also described how the judgment delivered by Datuk Mohktar Sidin in the Vincent Tan v MGG Pillai libel case was written in the office of VK Lingam. I was amongst the various staff present in the office assisting in the process by photostating and looking for the cases. The written draft judgment with corrections in VK Lingam’s handwriting and other related documents was given to the Royal Commission and ACA.

I am also aware of a few other incidents in VK Lingam’s office where VK Lingam (and other lawyers) have also written or assisted the writing of draft judgments which included such cases like Ayer Molek where he also appeared as counsel for one of the parties. I was aware that the judgments were being drafted as I was present in the office but not assisting directly.

On the instructions of VK Lingam, I have at least on three occasions withdrawn large sums of money (accompanied by a bodyguard) between RM100,000 to RM300,000 which I then wrapped in gift boxes with the understanding that they were to be hand delivered by others to individual judges. On one occasion, I saw one of these money boxes being placed together with a box containing a cake to be delivered to a judge.

I also told the Royal Commission that in 1998 after I had given my statement, the ACA officers told me then that they could not proceed with the case because it involved top government people.

 

[eboss]

google translate x betoi lo ayat berbelit belit mcm lingam..))

correct...correct...correct

 

[belina]

Guna translate gitu..pening le kepala..heheheh ayat bukannya tersusun betul..tunggang langgang r bro..heehhehehe

 

[papayaomela]

Inilah Malaysia. dah ada bukti video dan saksi penting pun kata takde saksi. Hakim boleh diatur dan dijualbeli. Ini apa ni? Mcm ni ke keadilan? Patutnya hakim dilantik ikut pengalaman dan senioriti. baru betul.

 

[shane]

Bar Council ‘appalled’ at government stand on Lingam

By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 11 – The Bar Council said today it was disheartened by the government’s position in the V.K. Lingam controversy which it said had brought the Malaysian justice system into shameful disrepute. Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan said today that he was appalled at the government’s stand that no wrongdoing could be established in the probe into the V K Lingam video clip incident.

Lingam, a senior lawyer, had been secretly recorded on video engaged in a telephone conversation where he appears to be brokering senior judicial appointments. The video first surfaced in 2007 and became a major campaign issue in Election 2008 for the opposition.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz sparked an uproar in Parliament on Monday when he said “judiciary fixer” Lingam had been let off the hook “because he had broken no law”. Nazri also suggested that Lingam breached no laws as he might “have just acted to fix the appointment of judges as if he was brokering the appointment of senior judges to impress people”.

Nazri argued that from the legal perspective Lingam could have merely made a suggestion as to who should be appointed to senior posts in the judiciary. A royal commission had proposed that action be taken against Lingam and several others purportedly involved in the recording including former Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan, a close friend of former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Nazri revealed that investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on the figures named also found no conclusive evidence that there was any form of power abuse by any of them. “Such a simplistic and irresponsible conclusion is an affront to the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI)’s commendable work of thoroughly and objectively sieving through the evidence presented.

“The RCI found that wrongdoings had indeed been committed, and it further identified some breaches of statutes applicable to the circumstances,” Ragunath said in a statement today. He added that Lingam’s statement that he was able to fix the appointment of judges “brings into contempt the administration of justice.”

“The video clip raises grave questions but there is also other evidence of serious misdeeds, for example Dato’ V.K. Lingam’s authorship of a judgment in a case in which he had himself appeared as counsel for one of the parties. “Another example is the clear evidence of the joint New Zealand holiday taken by Dato’ V. K. Lingam and then-Chief Justice Tun Eusoffe Chin and their respective families, which wholly discredited their claims for many years that they had met only by chance,” he said.
Ragunath stressed that these incidents must be investigated to determine if the allegations were true.

“What happened has undoubtedly brought the Malaysian judicial institution into shameful disrepute. To now say that no laws have been broken and to classify the affair as ‘No Further Action’ is to selectively and arbitrarily apply justice. “The tragic irony will not escape the Malaysian public – the very system of justice that Dato’ V. K. Lingam has been found to have abused and made a mockery of now refuses to mete out justice against him,” he said.

Pakatan Rakyat MPs yesterday presented the alleged key witness that may support their claims that Lingam and Eusoff had planned their New Zealand trip together. They had hoped the alleged key witness, Lingam’s former secretary Jayanthi Naidu, would prove that the government was attempting to cover up the scandal which has raised suspicions about possible collusion.

However Nazri refuted today that Jayanthi was the witness that MACC was looking for.

Dia nak cari saksi yg kata Lingam ni baik, 'alim & warak...... nanti jumpa la tu....