| Judicial Rot | | Print | |
|
Page 1 of 2 by ANWAR IBRAHIM
The rot in Malaysia's judicial system is pervasive and extends to the highest offices of power, both past and present. And now there is a videotape that many Malaysians — including many in the local bar — believe to be proof. Last month, I released a videotaped recording showing a prominent local attorney, V.K. Lingam, discussing the appointment of top judges to the federal court. The person on the other end of the line appeared to be none other than Malaysia's top judge, Ahmed Fairuz. The substance of the conversation leaves little doubt that what transpired was influence peddling and fixing of judicial appointments. Since its posting on my Web site, the recording has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times and has sparked public rallies throughout Malaysia. I have not disclosed how I received this tape in the interest of protecting the witness's personal safety. Interested readers can view the video here. I vouch for its authenticity. In the video, which was recorded in 2002, Mr. Lingam is seen and heard describing conversations and meetings the purpose of which were to gain influence with then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed to make favorable judicial appointments. The substance of his legal work, boasts Mr. Lingam, would be meaningless unless he did his part in securing friendly judges who would rule in favor of his clients. On the tape, Mr. Lingam remarked that "... half the time we are talking about judiciary rather than doing the work. But if I don't do this part, my work will be useless." For Mr. Lingam, this kind of lobbying is par for the course. In 1994, for example, he enjoyed a lavish vacation in New Zealand with another chief justice, Tun Eusoff Chin, allegations that Mr. Lingam denied until photographic evidence and copies of travel itineraries from an insurance investigation put the two families on the same flight and at the same tourist destinations. The contents of the video came as no surprise to many Malaysians, who recall Dr. Mahathir's orchestrated efforts to emasculate the judiciary in 1988. At that time, Dr. Mahathir's sacking of Tun Salleh Abbas, the then-chief judge, and other senior judges, left me deeply concerned about the breakdown of constitutional checks and balance inherent in our parliamentary democracy. Dr. Mahathir's handpicked judges signaled the beginning of an era when the judiciary became enslaved to the executive branch. Since then, the executive has given short shrift to matters of accountability, governance and transparency in the judiciary. Which brings us to today's scandal. Mr. Lingam's close ties to Dr. Mahathir, a former chief justice and the late attorney general, Mohtar Abdullah, as well as his relationship with the current chief justice have put him at the center of this most recent controversy. Yet he appears to be immune to the legal process, shielded by the unseen hand from the nation's law enforcement agencies, which seem bent on persecuting the whistleblowers rather than catching the culprits. After the video was released the government established a three-member panel with virtually no powers of investigation to probe the authenticity of the videotape. Three weeks after this panel began its work, it has produced no results and seems to have no mandate to look into the questions of corruption that the videotape raises. Meanwhile, the federal Anti Corruption Agency has threatened to arrest two individuals who helped bring the tape to light unless they divulge the identity of their source, and recent comments made by the head of the agency suggest a similar ultimatum may soon be issued against me. Such measures do not inspire confidence. They have, however, sparked public outrage. Last month, the Malaysian Bar Council staged an unprecedented demonstration in Kuala Lumpur. More than 2,000 lawyers marched to Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's offices to demand accountability and judicial reform. Political parties from the opposition including the Justice Party (Keadilan) as well as a few hardy voices from within the government, have demanded that an independent Royal Commission be established to investigate this scandal. Other independent bodies, such as Transparency International, have joined the chorus for a full and transparent inquiry. Yet the government's response has been uninspiring. Prime Minister Badawi came to power in 2003 promising to clean up corruption and depoliticize the judiciary. His lack of action since the video's release demonstrates how little he has accomplished on both fronts. He has rejected demands to establish the Royal Commission and instead has spent more than a month calling for verification of the authenticity of the video -- a task that requires no more than a few hours of laboratory work.
Meanwhile, Cabinet members, some of them implicated in the videotape, have issued statements to the media telling them to report "responsibly" on the issue. "On this earth, we can do whatever we like, but you must remember that when you die, you have to answer to someone," Tengku Adnan, minister for tourism, told reporters. His name is mentioned in the tape no less than 10 times as someone who could facilitate meetings with the prime minister to discuss judicial appointments. The two men best able to explain the tape, Mr. Lingam and Mr. Fairuz, have remained silent, apparently hoping that a combination of public apathy and the absence of an independent media will soon kill the story. |



