On the Quest for Justice

I submitted a reply on the article ‘Tun Salleh Abas – The Quest for Justice’ which appeared on Malaysia Today as follows:

On the Quest for Justice,

My take is:

1. The story of the Agong then took exception of Tun Salleh Abas (TSA) was already told to my family by a very close relative who was the then Chief Justice of Malaya. That many years ago, one of my late brothers, a staunch Pas supporter, on a family visit asked the relative about the story behind TSA’s dismissal as that late brother had heard several versions.

My family members who are still alive today could recall the gist of story told many years as follows

“TSA, annoyed by the noise/ construction of a royal family building near his house, went to our late relative and showed the draft letter of the complaint to the Agong as he sought the late relative’s opinion. Upon reviewing the draft, our late relative advised TSA that his complaint should be better resolved by discussing with the Agong; putting in writing and in such manner was indeed unruly and disrespectful (apparently written in a language suited to a peon). Our late relative then suitably redrafted the letter in case TSA was still adamant to proceed with the issuance of a letter. Subsequently when a sent copy to the Agong (copies of which were also given to the other rulers) was furnished to the said relative, he saw that it was the original version, not as he had amended. The Agong upon receipt of the said letter summoned TDM to dismiss TSA”.

Malaysia Today had earlier came out with the article on “Smokescreens and Disinformation: A distraction of issues” where the story of the Agong was mentioned in greater detail. RPK’s story appears to be in line with the story as told by my late relative. From another blog I read that TSA had written two letters to the then Agong.

2. Encik Musa bin Ismail said “To the Hadhari Government the matter is conclusive, closed and "buried" and could not be "exhumed" on the grounds of finality of a case.”

Perhaps those who had initiated to exhume the 20 year old (complicated) case did not know or had forgotten the specific details and inner intricacies involved nor consulted the proper records.

The primary reasons for the Government to close the case could be because

- it had served its primary purpose which is part and parcel of a concerted scheme to shore up the fledging popularity of the present Executive via advocating populist issues such as judicial reforms and to take the opportunity to bash up TDM and or

- those in the know of the inner intricacies and complexities of the case were finally able to convince the present Executive on the merits of closing the matter

3. Not many of the general population would agree with Encik Musa’s statement on public furor about the closing of the case. For obvious reasons, the whole issue of TSA had been blown up and skewed particularly by the main media. Specific interests groups like the Bar Council and those who have a historical and unforgiving hatred against TDM joined in the fray aggravating the issue further.

When I spoke to some in legal fraternity especially the younger ones, yes they supported the present Executive’s action on the matter but could hardly remember or explain the details of the case. But to them it was done in the best interest of the country’s judiciary process and so they support.

To the many others (outside the fraternity) I spoke with, they just don’t see the benefits from reviving this 20 year old case which they have totally forgotten (not to mention how complicated was the whole issue and for that matter many of those directly and indirectly associated with the case have passed away) and the justification for the payment of compensation. To some, they sounded so annoyed. To them, they don’t bother because they are unaffected but also queried the reasons for bringing the case up now when there are more currently important national issues to be focused and resolved urgently and in priority, in particular to bread and butter issues.

4. What would ‘any lawyer with an ounce of brain’ do about the buzz that TSA has a son-in-law who is the CEO of Scomi (where secrets of the numerous contracts are deemed kept)? We are aware who the major shareholder of Scomi is and how influential he is to the present Executive. Connect this buzz of such relationships to the “redemption” of TSA. Can the present Executive be truly independent and honest in his actions on the TSA case?

While the case for judicial reforms has its merits, for reasons 1 to 4 above, I don’t share the same feelings for the TSA case to proceed further.

For a Muslim, we find Almighty’s guidance in the 5 pillars of Islam and the 6 pillars of Faith and in this respect not only on Fiqh.

I hope those who had exhumed a forgotten 2O year case had done so with good intentions (niat) and without malice.

End.