A drunkard never hides the truth
We are all mature and old enough to know a simple fact of life - a drunkard never tells lies,he speaks the truth,the absolute truth.He does not need to take an oath to tell the truth as many who do so,in reality never speak the truth.
If Lingam was "drunk" there is more reason to believe he is speaking the truth,nothing but the truth.If so why need Royal Commission?
Dr.Chris Anthony
Adnan: Lingam either mad or drunk
Chua Sue-Ann Malaysiakini Jan 17, 08 4:35pm
Senior lawyer VK Lingam must have been "mad or drunk", said Tourism Minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor in denying any involvement in the appointment of judges as suggested in the VK Lingam tape.
In the grainy 14-minute clip, recorded in late 2001, Lingam had mentioned Tengku Adnan’s name 11 times.
The lawyer, who was purportedly talking to former chief justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, had suggested that Tengku Adnan, who was then a deputy minister in the prime minister’s department, could flex his influence on former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad on the appointment of ‘friendly’ judges.
“I think the man (Lingam) is either mad or drunk. I didn’t bother to call him. It must be untrue,” said the minister who appeared to be peeved by the question.
Name used in vain
Earlier, Tengku Adnan was quizzed on his alleged involvement in the appointment of judges by Bar Council lawyer Christopher Leong.
Responding to a question from the lawyer, he said Lingam had used his name in vain.
Leong: (As per the transcript) the speaker (Lingam) refers to facts ... and states that his source of information is yourself.
‘The CJ (Dzaiddin Abdullah) said his relative is now the Agong, so he wants to stay on to 68, so, Tengku Adnan said - I told Tengku Adnan, yesterday I had a meeting with him - he said PM is already very angry with him … and … he said no problem, he is going to make you acting err... confirm your position as PCA (President of Court of Appeal – judiciary’s No 2), working very hard, and then get (the late) Tan Sri Mokhtar (Abdullah) as CJM (Chief Judge of Malaya)’
‘Ah, so we just keep it confidential. I am working very hard on it. Then there is a letter, according to Tengku - I am going to see him tomorrow - there is a letter sent to … ah … CJ - I mean Tan Sri Dzaiddin - that Datuk Heliliah, …er Datuk Ramli and Datuk Maarop be made judges, and he rejected that Dr Andrew Chew and apa itu Zainudin Ismail lah because Zainuddin Ismail who condemned your appointment and Tan Sri Mohtar's appointment’.
Tengku Adnan: No. It’s definitely not me.
Leong: So, the speaker got the facts right but ascribed it to the wrong person?
Tengku Adnan: Yes, I don’t know if the facts are right or wrong.
Leong: There are 11 instances where the speaker referred to you by name, (claimed) to have spoken to you, met, called and will call you - you have denied all these. Would you agree (that) if this were made up, he had quite an imagination?
Tengku Adnan: I can’t say.
Leong: Why do you think that the speaker, of all the names, specifically picks your name?
This question irked Tengku Adnan, who explained that his name had been misused in other situations.
Tengku Adnan: (My name is used) for all sorts of things (including) requests for donations to build mosques, masuk penjara (imprison someone). It’s wrong! We’ve got to be fair. He can use my name (but) I do not know. Anybody can use my name.
Mahadev: You are angry?
Tengku Adnan: I sometimes get annoyed. Being (a) human being, I just keep it to myself. A lot of things (are) happening but we do not understand.
Leong: Has VK Lingam lied?
Tengku Adnan: I do not know.
Strictly business
Meanwhile, Tengku Adnan also told the commission that his relationship with business tycoon Vincent Tan and Lingam was strictly business but could not recall their business tie-ups.
He was responding to a list of companies mentioned by Leong to establish the minister’s business relationship with the duo.
“I cannot remember. There were many lawyers and many businesses,” said Tengku Adnan.
Among the companies listed by Leong were Berjaya Industrial Bhd, Berjaya subsidiary Cosway Malaysia and Digi Telecommunications Sdn Bhd.
The commission also heard that Tengku Adnan had known Tan since the 1990s and that Lingam was one of the lawyers appointed by Tan’s company.
“After I became active in politics around 1998, I sold a lot (of shares). I can’t remember ... I had many shares (in various companies) not only in Berjaya (companies),” said Tengku Adnan.
He also denied meeting Tan or Lingam socially or to discuss the appointment of ‘friendly’ judges.
Tengku Adnan said he only saw the Lingam tape in late September or October last year after being informed by a friend.
He also told the commission that today was the first time he had seen the full 14-minute footage as he had only viewed the first eight minutes on Internet video-sharing portal Youtube.
Leong then asked Tengku Adnan how he was able to identify the man featured in the video clip as Lingam, given his earlier statement that the two had minimal interaction.
“I only recognised him after viewing it (the video) for a while. Just like your (Leong’s) face, after this, I will recognise it too,” he replied.
After testifying that he does not have Lingam’s telephone number, Leong asked if Tengku Adnan was willing to produce his 2001 telephone records.“No problem. Why would I have a problem?” the minister replied.
Leong requested the documents be subpoenaed but commission chairperson Haidar Mohamed Noor declined saying that the panel will take note of that appeal.
After the hour-long interrogation, Tengku Adnan patted Leong on his back and smiled as he left the court room.
The minister was also cross-examined by deputy public prosecutor Azmi Ariffin and PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim’s lawyer M Puravalen.
Earlier, Tengku Adnan also told the commission that his responsibilities as deputy minister in the prime minister’s department were, among others, supervising the building and opening of court complexes, the National Civic Bureau and the Anti-Corruption Agency.
1 comment:
Yes, short is the memory of the key players mentioned in the Lingam Video Clip Saga. On Day 4 of the RCI when pressed for details and confirmations of the events and circumstances mentioned in the clip the players fell back to the classical defense strategy of denial - not involved in what was said and “can’t remember” or “my prerogative” and to the extent of calling the main actor in the clip “mad or drunk”.
It was worst in Adnan case. If Lingam was talking in Tamil, it is understandable that Adnan does not know what he was babbling about. But to deny all 11 references made to his name as untrue is just too much. He claimed his name has “value, aesthetic value”. But when Mahadev asked him if he had taken any steps to “clear his name” after being aware of the initial 8 min Clip, he said no. So what value now his name has except to bring in the Billions of Tourist dollars together with all the China Dolls problems via the Visa on Arrival. More details of his grilling at
Go H E R E
plus the 11 references to his name in the video clip
& Updates on Day 5 of the Confused former CJ Eusoff Chin
Post a Comment