Friday, January 05, 2018

Finally the TRUTH that lies behind Ops Lalang

FMT - World jurists condemned Mahathir for sacking Tun Salleh:

By Kua Kia Soong

Dr Mahathir has tried in vain to wriggle out of the responsibility for Operation Lalang. Now he is attempting to put the blame for the sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and three other Supreme Court judges on the Agung.

As I have pointed out often enough, these two outrages against Malaysian democracy in 1987 and 1988 respectively are inextricably linked

I am surprised that the opportunist politicians and crypto-Mahathiristas in Pakatan Harapan and the lawyers who were outraged in 1988 have so quickly forgotten recent Malaysian history or have lost their tongues. Let me remind them of Lord Denning’s words:

“Silence is not an option when things are ill done.”

We know that 1987 was a time during Dr Mahathir’s term when he was faced with the biggest threat to his rule, with Team B under Tengku Razaleigh challenging the results of the Umno elections. A Supreme Court decision in Team B’s favour would have meant the end of Mahathir’s grasp on power.

Thus, in the run-up to Operation Lalang and before the assault on the judiciary resulting in the sacking of the Lord President and several other Supreme Court judges, the ruling party catalysed a tense situation in the country by creating “sensitive” issues involving the sending of non-Mandarin qualified administrators to the Chinese schools, the conversion of Muslims to Christianity and even threatening to organize a 500,000-people Umno rally in the capital.

All the ensuing tension was to justify unleashing ‘Operation Lalang’ to deal with the so-called “threat to national security”.

The Tunku, at the time of his twilight years, had more perception and integrity than Mahathir in his prime and certainly enough political nous to see how Operation Lalang was orchestrated:

“Umno was facing a break-up. The Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s hold on the party appeared critical when election rigging was alleged to have given him a very narrow victory over Tengku Razaleigh. The case alleging irregularities brought by Umno members was pending in court. If the judgement went against him he would have no choice but to step down. So, he had to find a way out of his predicament. 

A national crisis had to be created to bring Umno together as a united force to fight a common enemy – and the imaginary enemy, in this case, was the Chinese community.” ( K.Das/ SUARAM: ‘The White paper on the October Affair and the Why? Papers’, SUARAM Petaling Jaya 1989: 10)

In the Foreword to ‘May Day for Justice’ written by Tun Salleh & K. Das after the sacking of the Lord President, the Tunku further wrote:

“I do not know how any honourable government can stay in office after this book has been published. It constitutes a denunciation which cannot be answered without confessing to the most dishonourable conduct in public life…it struck a terrible blow, not only to the independence of the Malaysian Judiciary – and ruined the careers of at least three honourable men – but to national pride itself.”

In another Foreword, the Hon Justice Michael Kirby CMG Commissioner of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) had this to say:

“Singled out for particular mention was the concern of the ICJ about the campaign of attacks on the judiciary by the Prime Minister of Malaysia, the inducements made to the Lord President to resign his office quietly, the apparently biased constitution of the tribunal set up to enquire into his removal, the inclusion in the tribunal, as its chairman, of a judge who succeeded to the Lord President’s office, the unprecedented action of that judge in securing the removal and suspension of Supreme Court judges who provided a stay to allow the constitutionality of the tribunal to be tested in the Malaysian Supreme Court, and the “unpersuasive” report of the tribunal following which the Lord President was removed.”

The highly respected former Lord President Tun Mohamed Suffian Bin Hashim had this to say on the sordid affair and he pointed his finger squarely at PM Mahathir:

“The disgrace brought to Malaysia by the Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad in dismissing the Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas, and two senior Supreme Court judges will long hang around his neck like an albatross. What the PM did astound the nation and the appalling news was swiftly spread to all four corners of the globe…Tun Salleh has since revealed all the facts leading to, and regarding the so-called inquiry into his alleged misbehaviour. Facts which because of the Prime Minister’s total control of the mass media he was able at the time to keep from public knowledge and which were also kept out of the knowledge of the two foreign members of the Tribunal who came from Sri Lanka and Singapore.” (K. Das, ‘Questionable Conduct over that May day Caper’, 1990)

The Malaysian Bar Council at the time also did not mince their words in a statement:

“From the Prime Minister’s attacks on the Judiciary, it appears that he seriously misconceives the doctrine of the separation of powers…It is not for the Executive to tell the judges how to construe the laws.”

In 1990, when Lim Kit Siang was opposing Mahathir, he had alleged:

“The Prime Minister and the Attorney-General had refused to throw light on this shocking discrepancy, which raised doubts as to whether the Prime Minister ever had an audience with the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong on 1 May 1988…Grave doubts and mystery surround the judicial crisis of 1988…This clearly shows the parentage and background of the book ‘Judicial Misconduct’ – that it is not an independent assessment but an apologia for the Government assault on the Malaysian Judiciary.” (K. Das, ‘Questionable Conduct over that May Day Caper’, 1990)

There were many other eminent jurists from around the world who were aghast at this flagrant assault on one of the vital institutions of any democracy: Geoffrey Robertson QC; Hugo Young; P.N. Bhagwati, Former Chief Justice of India; Prof. Andrew Harding writing for the Commonwealth Judicial Journal; Bernard Levin of The Times, London; Professor F.A. Trinidade of The Law Quarterly Review; Nihal Jayawickkarama of the University of Hong Kong. All of them were quite clear in pointing their fingers at the Prime Minister of the day for the sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas – Dr Mahathir.

In his book ‘May Day For Justice’, Tun Salleh Abas’ denunciation of then Prime Minister Mahathir begins on the first page itself:

“When all else is forgotten, this question alone may remain to haunt us: Did I lie when I said the Prime Minister of Malaysia accused me of being biased in cases involving the political party, Umno? Did I invent this story that the Prime Minister raised the matter when he gave me the reasons why I was found unsuitable to remain Lord President of the Supreme Court of Malaysia and should, therefore, step down? That because of my speeches about Umno I was biased as a judge?

“I have no doubt – and few would now disagree – that it was the Umno saga that led to my destruction as a judge.”

I urge those who have forgotten or were too young to know the truth about Mahathir’s assault on the Malaysian Judiciary to read the two books by Tun Salleh Abas and K. Das. Try as he may, Mahathir will never succeed in changing Malaysian history as long as there are still good men and women ready to defend the truth, justice, democracy and human right.



    Zaid Ibrahim is correct. Whatever the wrongs of what happened, it is fundamentally a government matter.
    That is Why I am dead set against Barisan National, the government of the day, then and now.

    Trying to make it make it a personal matter against a particular person is a misunderstanding of the nature of the system.

    Najib, on the other hand is facing a huge personal pit, because the money went into his PERSONAL bank account. When that happens, that is far deeper than a government matter.

    1. I am not surpised how you rush in to defend Mahathri, blaming his Machiavellian manipulation on "fundamentally a government matter."

      Mahathri was about to lose his case against Ku Li, and went about creating a situation where he could sack the judges, neutralised any possible legal challenge against him within UMNO, even to the extent of manipulating into play Ops Lalang ... and you deemed that intra-UMNO party personal tussle as a government affair?

      Wow, how much dedak has Mahathir fed you?

    2. "Mahathri was about to lose his case against Ku Li, and went about creating a situation where he could sack the judges, neutralised any possible legal challenge against him within UMNO, even to the extent of manipulating into play Ops Lalang .."

      Ada evidence tsk?
      Any links you can refer to, of the credible kind, not Trump-like fake news?

    3. is there anything unfair in the mahathir vs razaleigh contest? i still dun understand y tis involved judges. i dun see any diff with the judge action n ros attitude toward dap recent party election. can u enlighten us?


  2. Wow, how much dedak has Najib fed you, Malaysian Official 1 lackey ?

    1. there is a HUMONGOUS difference between you and me - you defend Mahathri at every turn of the way, I do NOT defend Najib at all, wakakaka

    2. Huh....U do NOT defend Najib at all, wakakaka...openly lah...

      Otherwise where to hide yr face le?

    3. wakakaka, now you want to qualify your silly suspicions as "not openly", wakakaka again - just wanna win

    4. You dare quote Lord Danning's " Silence is not an option when things are ill done " but your deafening silence on MOI's ill deeds are enough to hang you, wakakaka.

      "... I do NOT defend Najib at all..." This is rich....when pencuri plundered our coffer, what did you do? Buat diam saja, pretend nothing's happening, remember that quote... silence is not an option ? wakakaka....OK, OK, we will indulge didn't defend Najib at all, hihihi, you just keep very silent about his plundering and covering up...and when push come to shove, you just brushed it off as 'naughtiness' and 'misdemeanor'....podah la.

    5. and just what did you do whee Mahathir was mutilating the Constitution, Royalty, Senate, Judiciary, fostering cronyism and wasting national resources on his hair brain schemes and projects?

    6. Me ? I was still in school uniform and busy with extra curriculum activities then. But actually you should ask yourself WTF were you up to that time ? Keeping silent then like you are doing it now in pinklip's regime ? Sheesh.....

    7. Wakakakaka....Wanna win over u, an unworthy wordsmith?

      Tan Ku Ku lah!

      BTW, mamak didn't single-handedly run the country during his reign. He had accomplishes & there were such thing known as collective cabinet responsibility le!

      No matter how dictatorial mamak's reign was, his accomplishes, many r now fighting him in opposing camps, shared equal shares of misdeeds.

      and just what did they/you do when Mahathir was mutilating the Constitution, Royalty, Senate, Judiciary, fostering cronyism and wasting national resources on his hair brain schemes and projects?

      U seem to choose to forget that!

    8. to state the fact is not defend. avoid the fact can be kind of defend.

    9. CK, thanks for defending mahathir, well done, wakakaka

    10. JJ so you were too young to know shit - thus you never know the draconian rule of mahathir.

      as for me, I did my part against mahathir's dictatorship, to the best of my ability

    11. BY "to state the fact is not defend. avoid the fact can be kind of defend"

      HEAR, HEAR

    12. wakakaka, a new (il)logic, desperately grasped by Monsterball like a drowning man a straw

    13. "to state the fact is not defend. avoid the fact can be kind of defend"

      HY's piece of gem here must be aggravating, right ? what is so "illogic" about this ? you have been AVOIDING pinklip's "misdemeanor" right from the start and as so aptyly to the point.."avoid the fact can be kind of defend" ! Face the fact man, don't be so cowardly to twist and turn with mere words.

    14. Me... defending mamak?

      Again..U tan ku ku lah & I won't waste my time explaining to a clothless wordsmith about sopo maneuver le!

      Wakakakaka...u did yr part against mahathir's dictatorship, to the best of yr ability, by hibernating DownUnder & only now keep farting about mamak's past misdeeds after his retirement!

      马后炮 with overexposed syiok-sendirism for doing what u DIDN'T do then now!

      Sama2 like yr current write-ups - behave miao2ly with the current taiko. Meanwhile keep digging up his enermy's past misdeeds to strengthen taiko's weakening base to 'earn' brownies!

    15. and you "have been AVOIDING Mahathir's heinous abuses of Malaysia's constitution, human rights, judiciary, senate and resources right from the start that you could be labelled as "avoid[ing] the fact (as a kind of defence)"!

      Face the fact young bloke, don't be so cowardly [as] to twist and turn with mere words. But I'm considerate, putting your blind-as-bat idol worship of Mahathir as a youngster too young to know what that Old Man did to us and the nation - take it sportingly from Uncle Kaytee wakakaka who has consumed more salt that you have eaten rice.

    16. CK, Thou doth protest too much, methinks, wakakaka

      can't say than what I've said, about me being Downunder and why I can't reveal more, wakakaka, but all have been thanks to Maddy

    17. Can't say?

      Perhaps nothing much to say except paid back time for whatsoever pinklips had done to u. Right?

      It's never been Maddy as u've kept broadcasting about!

      It's about pinklips right from the start when pinklips had taken over from the useless Pak lah.

      Just to remind u - yr torrents of attacks on Maddy, during Pak lah reign, was NOTHING in comparison with what's now on show in yr mamaky cinema while yr taiko's kleptomaniac reign supreme!


      Can't recall mamak's misdeeds?

      Selective anemia?


      Take yr pick lah!!

    18. Finally, a Freudian slip!

      U r sharing some similarities as that can't-see-further-than-his-nose kua!

      Kua has a perverted personal vendetta against mamak due to op lalang. He can't get passed that episode & move on.

      Where did u get yrs?

      Mamak stepped on yr cards tail!


    19. [But I'm considerate, putting your blind-as-bat idol worship of Mahathir as a youngster too young to know what that Old Man did to us and the nation - take it sportingly from Uncle Kaytee wakakaka who has consumed more salt that you have eaten rice.]

      Whooaa...what arrogance, what shit-prick to even have the audacity to talk about eating more salt than rice bla bla bla. I too have have uncles you know...and my uncles have eaten more salt ( gunny sacks of them, WAKAKAKA ) than your uncles have la. So I do know what's what in the happenings during Dr M's era....and there are ample reading materials to fill in the gap. So jangan la be so uppity on that high horse of get down and smell the coffee OK ?

      And who said I am a " blind-as-bat idol worship(per) of Mahathir "? Just because we all here do not idol worship pinklips like you do because of DEDAK does not inevitably translate to worshipping the Old Man.

      You are so single track mind which you have demonstrated so amply again and is always an "either for" or "against" line of thinking. Both kettle and pot are black, got it ? But we have the have no trouble seeing which is the
      clear and present danger and why we must put out this raging fire first. But in hindsight, I am now suspicious of your MO...methinks you have DELIBERATELY take up this line of accusation thinking that this will throw us into disarray and will divert us from your own corruption...yes corruption...moral corruption and hypocrisy, not much different from the Hadi of whom you are so fond of running down.

  3. Mahathir has carried his sins & baggage (including key players in his kleptocratic government then and all those corrupt UMNO leaders) with him to the other side. End of story.

  4. Take a look at how the UMNO case played out in the High Court. Raja Aziz Addruse described the defendent's strategy as "kamikaze" because in effect they were asking for UMNO to be declared unlawful. See the quotation from Asian Wall Street Journal:
    "Mr. Sri Ram had suggested that the
    provision cited by the dissidents should be
    considered along with the subsequent sec-
    tion of the act that deems societies with
    unapproved branches unlawful. However,
    Raja Aziz urged Judge Harun to ignore the
    broader provision and rule only on the
    unapproved branches, not UMNO’s
    Raja Aziz on Wednesday had called Mr.
    Sri Ram’s suggestion a “kamikaze defense
    . . . a do-or-die sort of thine.” He said that
    with the shifting of the hearing toward a
    court ruling on UMNO’s legitimacy, “the
    effect would be quite drastic . . . with far-
    reaching consequences.” Thursday, Raja
    Aziz said, “Now you see the danger of such
    a defense.”
    Indeed, Justice Harun Hashim made the declaration that UMNO was an unlawful party. Dissatisfied, the UMNO 11 made an appeal. A panel of 5 senior judges with Chief Justice Salleh Abas to chair was empanelled to hear the appeal. If the judgement overturned earlier ruling, there would be no further avenue for appeal. The fear of losing this appeal is real.

  5. I rather be simple minded and not vote for Dr. M or anybody associated with him (including DAP). I do not want vote for Najib also; so whom to vote for in GE 14 is a dilemma for me.

    1. Wakakakaka..Easy..Just vote for yr cat as dog is haram!

    2. By being simple minded, as claimed by you yourself, you have actually have in effect voted for Najib. The less voting population turn out, the better for the incument.

      Najib himself has previously announced : he doesn't need smart people, just being loyal and simple minded is enough, or something to that effect, wakakaka