KUALA LUMPUR: A retired Federal Court judge has lashed out at Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad alleging that the former premier had wanted to amend Article 121 of the Federal Constitution because he wanted the judiciary to be under his control.
“I believe the Prime Minister at the time wanted to become a dictator; I may be wrong but this is my conclusion,” Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin yesterday told reporters after receiving ex-gratia payment from the Government for the pain and loss he suffered during the 1988 judicial crisis.
Previously, Article 121 stated that judicial power of the Federation was “vested in a Supreme Court and such inferior courts as may be provided by federal law” but it was replaced in 1988 to place the courts’ jurisdiction in the hands of Parliament.
Azmi, 75, who received the payment from de facto law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, said: “He wanted to amend Article 121 which calls for the separation of powers. He already headed the Legislature and Executive. Now, he also wanted the judiciary under him.”
Adding that Dr Mahathir was “very clever” and always “killed two birds with one stone”, Azmi alleged that Dr Mahathir’s agenda was tied to the Umno 11 case involving then Umno vice-president Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah whose supporters had challenged his post as Umno president.
“With the judiciary under him, he could tell judges what to do. I am sure he will deny it,” said Azmi who was among six judges involved in the judicial crisis two decades ago.
Tun Salleh Abas, sacked as Lord President of the then Supreme Court (renamed Federal Court in 1994), also received his payment yesterday. The others who have already accepted the undisclosed payment were then Supreme Court judges Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Wan Mohamed Salleh and Datuk George Seah.
Compensation was also given to the families of the late Supreme Court judges Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh.
Azmi broke down and cried when he started talking to reporters at his house. He said his remaining 10 years as a judge were the worst days of his life where he only heard “simple cases” and lost the opportunity of being promoted.
“It (the payment) brings to an end the shameful episode of 1988.”
Judicial reform plan put on hold
KUALA LUMPUR: Neither the proposal to amend the Federal Constitution to set up the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) nor that to reinstate Article 121 to its pre-1988 position will be tabled in Parliament next week.
De facto law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who had presented his proposals to the Cabinet last week, said it needed more time for it to be tabled.
“Some people agree. Some people do not agree,” he told reporters yesterday after presenting ex-gratia payment to retired Federal Court judge Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin for the pain and loss he suffered during the 1988 judicial crisis.
Zaid thanked Chief Justice Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad for supporting the restoration of Article 121, adding: “I just need to convince other parties who are equally as powerful as I.”
For services rendered: Zaid (left) presenting the ex-gratia payment to Azmi in Kuala Lumpur on Friday.
On April 17, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had announced the Government was going to set up a JAC as part of its judicial reforms and would pay ex-gratia to the six judges who had been either sacked or suspended and later reinstated in 1988.
Zaid said he had been overly optimistic and should have been “more cautious.”
“But I am committed to these reforms. I will persuade the A-G, the PM?everybody. These two principles are sacrosanct and fundamental.
“And if we want to do justice to the country, we will do it.”
Asked whether Abdullah was committed to implementing both proposals, Zaid said:
“I believe so. But you have to ask him. I cannot speak for the Prime Minister.”
He added that reinstating the old Article 121 - so that judicial powers would be restored to the courts and guaranteeing separation of powers - and having the JAC did not mean the powers of the Prime Minister would be affected but that he would be managing power in a more reasonable manner.
“If we cannot implement these two, then we have failed,” he said.
Zaid, who had earlier presented ex-gratia payment to sacked Lord President Tun Sallah Abas, said it was significant the Government was able to make a contribution to all six judges and termed it a “closure to an embarrassing and shameful episode.”
He said the contribution was itself insufficient but people needed to know that the judges had defended the principle of separation of powers and that it should be free from outside influences.
Star Online
21/06/08
PEOPLE'S POWER
There is a difference between UMNO and Barisan Nasional. I want to make it clear that it is not the Barisan Nasional (BN) government, but the UMNO government. It is not the government, but UMNO. Barisan Nasional is a coalition of unequals, not equals. UMNO is the big brother in BN. Therefore UMNO must be held responsible; and more importantly, UMNO must not be allowed to hide behind the BN banner. UMNO is the enemy, not BN.
ReplyDeleteI have come to the conclusion that the easy solution is to completely defeat UMNO in the next elections.
In the 2004 elections (11th General Election), the voters gave good support to Mr.Abdullah Badawi. But reforms did not come. Why? Probably because UMNO had done well in the elections. If UMNO had done well in the elections, then the election results tell UMNO that the voters are satisfied with the status quo. If the voters are satisfied with UMNO, then no reforms are necessary. In the 2008 elections (12th General Elections), UMNO did not do well, but she managed to win. UMNO did lose the 2/3 majority in the Parliament, but she did win, nevertheless. Will UMNO undertake reforms now? I would not be surprised if she did not. Why should she? UMNO is still the winner in the elections; and she can plan to rise and may even succeed to rise again. So, as long as she wins, she will never undertake the reforms. So, how do the voters get the reforms that they need? The voters will get the reforms when UMNO is completely defeated in the 13th General Elections. If UMNO wins zero seats in the next elections (13th General Elections), then some other party would have to rule Malaysia. Let us call it Party B. If UMNO is completely defeated in the next elections (13th General Elections), then Party B would rule Malaysia. Would Party B undertake reforms? If Party B does not undertake reforms, then voters would know what to do.
There is no doubt that UMNO has used gerrymandering to strengthen herself. If we removed gerrymandering from UMNO, then there would be a reduced UMNO. So the non-UMNO voters of Malaysia have good reasons to vote against UMNO.
It is possible that UMNO has used the Police Force to strengthen herself. The Police Force is required to be neutral. But is the Police Force neutral? I appeal to the Police Force to be neutral.
UMNO is a race based political party and also the big brother of BN. So, the complete defeat of UMNO in the next elections is the only way to get reforms. The complete defeat of UMNO in the next elections is the only way to get a new beginning.
UMNO is inclined to believe that Malaysians cannot do anything if they are in any way dissatisfied. The voters, however, have to send a strong message to UMNO that the voters can do something: the voters can vote.
So, the next step for Malaysians is to completely defeat UMNO in the next elections.