Lim Kit Siang - question mark over 'Lingam Tape Investigation Panel'

A fundamental advice to conveners intending to hold an inquiry, no matter whether it carries a Royal Commission or otherwise, is that they should know beforehand what the findings would be.

If that cannot be 100% assured, limit the terms of reference to ensure desired finding, and if that outcome is still doubtful, well, don’t convene any inquiry but provide some excuse like a police investigation should be adequate.

Where doubts exist at all, don’t ever ever have a Royal Commission which has extraordinary powers – extraordinary powers that may lead to unforeseen independent actions/findings by the members.

Well, following the brouhaha over the Lingam videotape, DPM Najib has succumbed to pressure (probably to relieve any untoward bad publicity on the nearing general election) and has convened an ‘independent’ panel to investigate the authenticity of the tapes.

Just a little digression here – who could the owner of that tape, holding it for years until now when he probably grew dissatisfied with a number of ‘things’ to finally present it to Anwar Ibrahim?

But two days ago Malaysiakini reported that Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang criticized the limited terms of reference of the ‘independent’ panel of investigation. He said:

“In restricting the panel to the question of the authenticity of the Lingam tape instead of allowing full investigations into all aspects of the allegations of perversion of the course of justice and the compromising of judicial independence, impartiality and integrity raised by the video clip, the government is avoiding the imperative issue of the long-standing rot in the judiciary and the urgent need to restore national and international confidence in the system of justice with a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law.”

Lim has a certain verbosity that challenges our limited vocabulary. In plain street talk, Lim had said “Bullsh*t to just look into whether the tape was genuine or not. What about the more important issue, the recorded events showing a lawyer discussing appointments of judges with the current No 1 Judge? HTF are we gonna trust any judge again?”

Then the next day, Lim again attacked the ‘independent’ panel of investigation. Malaysiakini reported that Lim called for a member of the panel, former Chief Judge of Malaya Haidar Mohd Noor, to either decline or withdraw as chairperson of the three-man panel.

Lim said Haidar was involved in the 1988 judicial crisis which saw the unprecedented sacking of Salleh Abas, then Lord President, George Seah and the late Wan Suleiman Pawan Teh who were Supreme Court judges. Yes, I can see why Lim perceived Haidar's appointment as rather inappropriate.

Lim said that was the ‘mother of all judicial crises’ - hmmm, if the late dictator Saddam Hussein had patented the use of the phrase ‘mother of .....’, he would have been a very rich dead man by now – everyone seems to be using his rather unique and succinct phraselogical creation.

But Lim was fair in that he urged Haidar to clarify his role in the crisis, and that he (Haidar) must explain that ‘arbitrary and unconstitutional’ sacking of before taking any role connected with restoring national and international confidence in the judiciary.

See what I mean by Lim's challenging style of talking! But look, Haidar now has an opportunity to defend his role, a privilege that Abbas didn't enjoy.

Lim didn’t spare his former fellow DAP pollie as well, asking poor Lee Lam Thye to decline the appointment or withdraw.

But I do wonder which three independent personalities could be recruited for this investigation – the opposition of course aren’t exactly independent as they are out for blood.

Gosh, after 50 years of national independence, it has become even more difficult to find just three independently minded persons to fill such a panel, limited as the terms of reference may be.