Mahathir's Secret Power
-
With Indian blood actuallyOriginally posted by Dr Who:Island in Africa?
No-lah, this guy is an INDIAN pretending to be a Malay.
Ask any Malaysian, he 'll tell you Mahathir is actually Indian........
yah, that been going around for sometime -
Yar he has indian blood ancestry...from his father side. he declared it in his autobiography before wad..Originally posted by Dr Who:Island in Africa?
No-lah, this guy is an INDIAN pretending to be a Malay.
Ask any Malaysian, he 'll tell you Mahathir is actually Indian........ -
What is Mahathir doing shaking hands with the Great Satan? The same one who conned Mahathir into purchasing the wonderful F-18s ? -
Brudder! Watch out behind you!!!! -
Originally posted by Dr Who:
Brudder! Watch out behind you!!!!
good one -
I think his problem is the same as any other human being. Once u are in power, it is hard 2 step back and watch other people gain the power u have.Originally posted by sgboy2004:what's wrong with this fella nowadays with his recent spade of verbal bombardment at the new government leaders that he picked...
Nobody dares to oppose him as he will have his way (much like a tyrant) when he was in power; now he is no longer in control, yet he cannot lay back his need for control and power, and worse still, to see his projects like the bridge and the car maker being "ruined". -
Worst still,all his commision he supposed to get from the scraped projects,all with the wind,more worst, his son is a dumb one lost 100 bil in f exchange.Originally posted by nanren4ever:I think his problem is the same as any other human being. Once u are in power, it is hard 2 step back and watch other people gain the power u have. -
It seems that Dr MM is renegading on his word of not seeking power or publicity after retirement, unlike some politician of "some countries " - who will cling on to political positions after vacating the main seat (alluding to Singapore's MM LKY ).
After finding himself marginalised by the government machinery, which he had so craftily built up, he has decided to take his fight into the center of the UMNO Assembly by getting himself elected as a Representative Delegate of an UMNO Division.
Extracted from The Star, 24 August 2006, Thursday Edition:
Dr Mahathir to contest post of divisional delegate
ALOR STAR: Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad says he will contest the post of divisional delegate to the Umno general assembly in November.
He said at least two branches in the Kubang Pasu Umno division had nominated him to stand as a delegate.
Dr Mahathir: ‘Let me reassure you that I will not withdraw from the contest to be a delegate’
Each division is represented by seven elected delegates chosen from ordinary Umno members.
Six more delegates to the assembly comprise the division chief, deputy chief and vice-chairman as well as the Wanita, Youth and Puteri chiefs.
“Let me reassure you that I will not withdraw from the contest to be a delegate,” he said when addressing about 1,000 members of the Kedah Malay Assembly Hall at a hotel here yesterday.
At a press conference later, Dr Mahathir said he looked forward to representing the division at the assembly and would raise several key issues during the party assembly.
“I will not reveal now what I’m going to talk about at the general assembly. You will have to wait until that moment to find out,” he added.
Dr Mahathir also said he had heard that there were some parties who would “be approaching him soon” to urge him to withdraw as a delegate.
“If I withdraw from the contest, then there will be some people who will tag me as a pengecut (coward),” he said.
“So, for that reason alone, I have to attend the assembly if I win the contest to be a delegate,” he said.
Dr Mahathir reminded Umno members that the partyÂ’s struggles were not about an individual, but about Umno.
Dr Mahathir said he was sad that he had been accused of trying to split the party.
“I love Umno more than anybody else; and when the new Umno was formed in 1988, I was member No. 1 followed by my wife (Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali) who was member No. 2,” he added. -
Mahathir's "Secret Power" had help from the Singapore Government - when he tried to have a stronger grip on an independent Malaysian Judiciary, who was prepared to exercise its Constitutional Duties to check the mistakes of the Government.
In the process of challenging the Malaysian Judiciary, Mahathir filed charges against the Lord President of the Malaysian Judiciary (equivalent to our Chief Justice), the Chief Justice of Sabah, and the Chief Justice of Sarawak.
All three were unceremoniously removed from their office by an act of Parliament - (which amounted to a Parliamentary Revolt in total disrepect of the constitutional process ), with the Lord President position abolished, and a new position called the Chief Justice of Malaysia formed.
The previous Lord President and his two brother Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak were pressed ganged into a mock trial, with judges drawn from Commonwealth Countries - but all the judges that were 'borrowed' from the Commonwealth Countries were all known 'Pro-Government' Judges, and compliant to political instructions.
It is surprising that after Singapore had helped Mahathir in his 1988 battle to survive a Judicial Challenge, he became ungrateful in his attitude towards the Singapore Government.
Extracted from The Star, 23 August 2006, Wednesday Edition:
Regretably, Nazri was not honest enough to admit that four of the Malaysian judges had "sold their soul to the Devil", and the other two Judges from Sri Lanka and Singapore - were both obedient and dutiful servants of their respective governments.
Comment: Questions worth asking
23 Aug 2006
Santha Oorjitham
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EIGHTEEN years after former Lord President Tun Mohd Salleh Abas and two Supreme Court judges were sacked, many members of the legal community feel the judiciary has yet to recover fully.
Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim has received poison-pen letters alleging corruption in the judiciary.
Former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Shaikh Daud Md Ismail has said that whether corruption started before or after 1988, it "seemed to surface" after the removal of Salleh.
Relations between the Bench and the Bar, which were frozen after the judicial crisis, have not completely thawed.
Malaysian Bar president Yeo Yang PohÂ’s call last week for "a thorough re-examination of the events of 1988" could be a step towards truth and reconciliation. And in supporting the BarÂ’s proposal at a press conference today, Salleh has laid out some of the thorny questions that should be tackled.
His first question was about the judicial authority of the courts: "Where is the power?" he asked, claiming that since the 1988 judicial crisis, "the Government has tried to clip the power of the judiciary."
In 1988, Article 121 of the Federal Constitution was amended so that judicial power which was originally vested in the High Courts was restricted to "such jurisdiction and powers as may be conferred by or under federal law". This, Salleh said, removed judicial authority.
Next, he turned to the power of judicial review, to deal with "complaints by the rakyat" against "wrongdoing and abuses of power".
Ouster clauses in various Acts in Malaysia — such as the Printing Presses & Publications Act and the Police Act — make the decisions of ministers final so that they cannot be questioned in court. "Where can you go?" asked Salleh. Some lawyers point out that there is still scope for judicial review although it is now more limited.
He supported YeoÂ’s call but stressed that making amends to him and his fellow judges was not as important as restoring the judiciary and rule of law. Malaysia claims to have rule of law, he noted: "What kind of law?"
If the country really wants to be governed democratically and in accordance with law, he said, provisions of the Constitution relating to the judiciary which had been amended should be "looked into and amended so that we would be in line with all other democratic countries".
The statute of limitation period is over. Salleh is not suggesting legal action: "It is too big for the courts to decide," he said.
But the legal questions asked by the former Lord President are worth serious consideration as part of ongoing efforts to clearly mark the separation of powers between the executive, judicial and legislative branches of Government.
Revisiting the issues raised by Salleh, including the subject of judicial authority and judicial review, could help the process of strengthening the judiciary.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nazri: No reason to reopen the case
23 Aug 2006
KUALA LUMPUR: The sacking of a Lord President and two Supreme Court judges in 1988 will not be reviewed. And thatÂ’s final.
Minister in the Prime MinisterÂ’s Department Datuk Seri Mohd Nazri Aziz said there were no solid reasons to re-examine the case.
"We cannot keep on questioning past issues, otherwise thereÂ’ll never be any finality. ThereÂ’s no way weÂ’re going to re-open this matter," he said, commenting on a Press conference given earlier yesterday by former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas.
"He was tried by his peers. A panel of international judges was called. If we open this case, what other cases are people going to ask us to re-examine?"
In a case which many saw as a judicial crisis, Salleh was dismissed for misconduct in 1988 together with former Supreme Court judges Datuk George Seah and Datuk Wan Suleiman Pawan Teh.
A six-member tribunal comprising four Malaysian judges, a Sri Lankan judge and a Singaporean judge were appointed to decide the case.
When asked on allegations that the tribunal was a "kangaroo court", Nazri replied: "How can it be a kangaroo court? The judges were his peers. Are you saying that they were paid? You mean to say you can make deals with judges? I donÂ’t think so. No sane judge will make a deal to implicate his own brother judge."
The cards were already stacked against the persecuted honorable Lord President of the Malaysian Court and his two brother Justices.
That was the darkest hour for the Malaysian Judiciary, which will remain clouded by this grave injustice if Nazri and the present Chief Justice will not re-visit the circumstances and methods employed to remould an Independent Judiciary into one that is compliant to the Executive Branch.
Singaporeans have alot to learn from these events. -
this dude needs to chill~~
-
..........
-
It will be very interesting if the old case is re-opened, and for an error of justice to be corrected, as the former Lord President of the Malaysian Judiciary is now prepared to " break his 18-year silence " - and all for the interest of Justice
New light will be pouring onto Mahathir's darkest secrets that have been held for so long.
From the New Straits Times, 23 August 2006 Edition:
Judicial authority:
Salleh breaks 18-year silence
23 Aug 2006
Minderjeet Kaur
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas speaks for the first time on his sacking.
KUALA LUMPUR: Breaking an 18-year silence, former lord president Tun Salleh Abas yesterday charged that the powers of the courts had been curbed.
Saying the Executive had become very powerful, he added the power of judicial review — including against decisions of ministers — should be vested in the courts.
Speaking at the National Heart Institute, Salleh supported the Bar CouncilÂ’s proposal that the Government review the sacking of three judges, including himself, in 1988.
He appeared optimistic about current trends in the country, saying: "I feel there is more transparency now. People can voice out.
"Newspapers write articles sometimes opposing the Government.
"But, it is also time to review ministerial powers.
"At present, it is ‘any decision of the minister shall be final and cannot be questioned by the Court’."
In 1988, Salleh wrote a letter to the King on behalf of the judges expressing disappointment over accusations made by the then Prime Minister Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad against the judiciary.
Salleh was suspended. Later, five other judges were also suspended, of whom, two (the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawan Teh and Datuk George Seah) were dismissed.
Salleh, who will be 77 on Friday, was speaking to reporters after undergoing an angioplasty.
During the Press conference, he distributed a press statement on issues relating to the 1988 episode which led to a crisis in the judiciary.
"Since the judicial crisis took place in 1988, the Government has tried to clip the power of the judiciary. The way to do it, which I think is absolutely wrong, is to take away the vesting of judiciary authority from the courts.
"At one time, the courts had what we call the power for judicial review which is to receive complaints from the rakyat against wrongdoings and abuse of power."
He said the public should be allowed to take their complaints to the upper courts as practised in England and India. "It is very healthy.
"But in this country, you canÂ’t do that simply because the Government does not want to be tested as to the rights and wrongs of the GovernmentÂ’s doing."
He proposed the laws be amended to allow greater judicial independence.
"For example, if people want to hold a meeting, a rally or a speech, they need to apply for a permit but if the permit is not given by the local police chief, you can appeal to the chief police officer. But his decision is final and cannot be questioned in court.".
After the 1988 crisis, Salleh said he became disillusioned with the law.
"So much so that I never encouraged my children and grandchildren to take up law. I took my comfort and solace in becoming a simple gardener."
Asked how the 1988 crisis took place, he said it started when two Asian Wall Street Journal reporters made certain comments for which their visas were withdrawn. The matter went to court.
"Justice Datuk Harun Hashim then made a very strong comment on the power of the Government to withdraw the visa. The Government started to see the judiciary as interfering with the Executive. A lot of statements were made by the previous Prime Minister against the judiciary. I donÂ’t want to go further than that."
(In September 1986, the Government suspended the publication of the Asian Wall Street Journal and served a 48-hour expulsion order on two of its reporters — John Berthelsen and Rapheal Pura. The Journal challenged the order in court. The Supreme Court ruled on Nov 3 that the suspension of the Journal and the expulsion order on the journalists were wrong. The paper resumed publication and the expulsion order was quashed.)
Salleh said: "Political parties should not be a law unto themselves whereby disputes within the parties are not the subject of judicial review. Thus the parties become judges in their own cause, a clear violation of the principle of natural justice.
"More than this, the appointment and promotion of judges must be transparent if unhealthy frustration within the judiciary is to be avoided."
Bar Council president Yeo Yang Poh had said recently that a major mistake which had damaged democracy and the rule of law in the country was the "shameful episode in 1988 when the institution of the judiciary was attacked by the executive, resulting in the unfair and unceremonious dismissal of three top judges, and injuring many more".
Salleh said the councilÂ’s proposal to review the matter was for the countryÂ’s benefit, "which we want to see being governed democratically and in accordance with the rule of law, so that the system will endure for many generations to come".
He added the Bar CouncilÂ’s proposal should not be taken lightly as it involved a serious attempt to restore the judiciary to its "former golden era".
On Minister in the Prime MinisterÂ’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul AzizÂ’s statement dismissing the proposal, Salleh said: "Reading (NazriÂ’s) statement, I can only conclude it was made impromptu, off the cuff, without much study... I thought it was made in haste."
Salleh said he had no personal interest in the investigation, adding any such decision would be "a political decision... It would be up to the Government".
However, if called upon to give evidence, he said: "I would definitely like it." -
how many more years that old man have? he wants to live it unhappily then fine with him.
but i sure will live to see the day he die one. -
Let's shake for old times sake OK ? -
Anwar claimed that he has evidences of Mahathir's corruption acts
-
This Prime Minister who shook Mahathir's hand is DEAD. He was Rafik Hariri, PM of Lebanon. -
I'd rather shake the hand of this Iranian dude. Let's go nuclear man!