Steve Raju Naidu: All you fellas out there are real losers. Shame on you! Now you all come out raining lawsuits on RPK? If indeed you were chastised and victimised, why did it take you all so long to file a suit?
Rosmah had the cheek to say that she has better things to do than to respond to RPK's allegation. So why are you suing him now? Is this going to be another Perwaja Steel, Altantuya or Anwar case?
We Malaysians are not that dumb. With education comes wisdom. Why would RPK put his reputation on the line and make these accusations?
Obviously he has the proof. Let him have his day in court. The way I see it, BN's days are numbered. Good will always triumph over evil.
Ian Teh: The raft of lawsuits brought against Raja Petra, all at the same time, smells of a coordinated effort to stop ‘Malaysia Today' in its tracks.
However, his past experience suggests these wouldn't work.
Neither would most things they try, be they against Raja Petra, Anwar Ibrahim or anyone else exposing the muck that surrounds those in power.
Until and unless the powers-that-be are given a right and clean flush, the rakyat will see these actions - lawsuits, police reports, allegations of sexual impropriety - as what they are, namely tools to silence their accusers.
On Court rejects application to call Najib as witness
Disgusted: To be fair to Najib, counsel should seek the views of the international media and human rights organisations since they are outsiders and their opinions will be unbiased.
They will tell us whether it is necessary or not that Najib take the stand. This judge seems to have made up his mind and can't wait to sentence the arrested three.
CG: As long as the court rejects calling Najib as a witness, the rakyat will assume that Najib is somehow linked to the murder.
There are no two ways to clear the DPM's name. Go to the court. What are you afraid of, Najib? Or rather, is the judge afraid of the DPM?
On Karpal: Najib must testify in Altantuya murder trial
Steve Raju Naidu: Yes, we want Najib in court because we need to know who authorised the release of the C4 explosives? Who deleted the immigration records?
Why were Rosmah's bodyguards involved? What is the connection? Where is the photograph of all of them in Paris?
Why did the PI retract his statements? Why was the prosecution changed at the last minute?
Who interfered with Sirul's first lawyer? Why did he back out? Why was the judge changed?
Why did both the prosecution and defence rise and object what Boomirang had to say about Najib? A whole load of unanswered questions. You bet we want Najib in court!
On No more waffling, we want the police report NOW
Yap Choi Yin: Let it be said from the very outset that the first information report made by the complainant to the police is the most important document for the defence of the accused person because it frames the charge and therefore limits the evidence that will be allowed in the case.
It is not a joke that if there is no first information report, then it has to be concluded that no report was made, and that being the case, there is no case to meet.
In this respect, public utterances of BN ministers and the PM himself raise very serious suspicion that the police and the Barisan Nasional government are not clean and that the pressure that is brought to bear on Anwar has an ulterior agenda and it is not a good one.
I say to DSAI that he must not give in to police request for his DNA.
The law requires the police to give to an accused person a copy of the first report. That being the law, now that DSAI has been questioned, he is by law entitled to obtain a copy of the report.
I have had a similar experience and can say that the judges, police and the whole apparatus of law enforcement in Malaysia believe they have power to act with impunity.
The case of the Anwar's entitlement to a copy of the first information report and the police's rejection of Anwar's right is a classic case of police abuse of their powers.
The right of Anwar in law is provided for in the rules of evidence and criminal procedure.
Yet, he is still improperly obstructed from enforcing his rights. What does that say of our Malaysian apparatus of law ?
Mickel Raj: In Anwar's case of sodomy, why has Saiful not been arrested and charged for a similar case as he is not a minor?
If its true of what he says, he must be arrested and charged under the same case.
If found guilty, he should be given rotan and jail if the law says so. It would be very strange if he knew the consequences of the law and still reported it, unless he has some thing more rewarding than the jail term he is going to receive. From where?
As I see it, there is no smoke without fire.
Meng: You sometimes wonder how many times the government of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi can shoot themselves in the foot before they realise what is going on.
As in 1998, the many who were apolitical and apathetic became reformasi supporters simply because of the injustice heaped upon Anwar Ibrahim. Even if many did not turun padang, many became sympathisers.
Its happening again, and if the government of Abdullah has to call fresh elections in light of a no- confidence vote and many will simply vote the Pakatan Rakyat into power because of sheer disgust over the way the police and the government are out to get Anwar.
Even if those few who voted BN in March were not convinced then, I believe they will be now. I believe Malays, especially the many conservative ones, will not tolerate the way Anwar was treated during his latest incarceration.
Being stripped, probed and poked before spending the night on a cold cement floor is very inhumane.
If the last elections saw a shift in Indian and Chinese voters, this time we shall see a shift in Malays as well. Good bye to the elitist BN government.
Raja Petra sued by army couple Jul 22, 08 4:59pm A husband-and-wife team of ranking army officers today filed a defamation suit against popular blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin over his statutory declaration which implicated them in the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu.
MCPX Lt Col Abdul Aziz Buyong and Lt Col Norhayati Hassan filed the suit at the Kuala Lumpur High Court this morning.
The couple is seeking RM1 million in damages each, exemplary damages and other costs. They also sought an injunction to restrain Raja Petra from repeating the alleged defamatory remarks.
Raja Petra had in a statutory declaration affirmed on June 18 implicated the couple as well as Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's wife Rosmah Mansor in the death of Altantuya.
According to the statutory declaration, Aziz had placed C4 on various parts of Altantuya's body while being witnessed by Rosmah and Norhayati.
Social stigma
The couple claim the implication in the murder had caused them undue social stigma and was libelous in nature.
Last week Raja Petra was arrested and charged with criminal defamation under Section 500 of the Penal Code. He is out on a RM2,000 bail, with the trial set to start on Aug 15. This is not the first time the popular blogger's articles have attracted lawsuits.
On May 27, the Alor Star High Court ordered Raja Petra to pay damages over libel claims by a university head.
University Utara Malaysia and its vice-chancellor Nordin Kardi filed a lawsuit against Raja Petra over an article that alleged Nordin had plagiarised an article.
Court rejects bid to call Najib as witness Jul 23, 08 1:04pm The Shah Alam High Court today dismissed an application by lawyer Karpal Singh to call Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and two senior police officers to testify as witnesses in Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu's murder trial.
MCPXThe court also similarly dismissed Karpal's application to recall private investigator P Balasubramaniam to the witness stand in the trial.
Justice Mohd Zaki Yasin said that it was not necessary to call in Najib or to recall Balasubramaniam.
"The court will only exercise that when the need arises, before a decision is made," the judge said, adding that "at this moment, these applications are rejected."
The court said that Karpal did not have the legal standing to make the application as he was not a party to the trial.
Karpal told reporters that he might appeal the matter to the Court of Appeal.
The veteran lawyer, who is holding a watching brief for the family of the slain 28-year old Altantuya, had filed a court notice on Monday to compel Najib, Balasubramaniam and two other policemen to testify.
"It is necessary because Najib's evidence is needed for the just decision of this case because of the role that he is said to have played," Karpal had said then.
Karpal, also the DAP chairperson, wanted Balasubramaniam recalled following his sworn statement last month, linking Najib to Altantuya, which he swiftly retracted.
The private eye was the first prosecution witness in the case.
Victim's father frustrated
Balasubramaniam, who went missing after his explosive statements, is in hiding in a neighbouring Southeast Asian country, police have said.
Altantuya was murdered in 2006 and her body blown up with explosives in a remote forest, and Najib's close friend, Abdul Razak Baginda, is on trial for abetting the murder.
Abdul Razak, who told the court that Altantuya was his former lover, had hired Balasubramanian to keep her away from him before she was murdered.
Najib has denied ever meeting her.
Mongolian honorary consul Syed Abdul Rahman AlHabshi, who was present at Wednesday's proceedings, said Altantuya's father, Setev Shaariibuu, expressed his "frustration" over the way the trial was going.
"He is frustrated, he can't see any light at the end of the tunnel. Where is justice?" he told AFP.
The court hearing began on June 18, 2007, but has been caught in a web of complex legal proceedings.
The judge has yet to decide if government lawyers have a case against Abdul Razak and the two policemen.
Aliran: Don't reject because of technicalities
Meanwhile, reform movement Aliran today described the dismissal of Karpal's application as a "great shock to all those praying for justice to prevail".
Aliran president P Ramakrishnan said that Karpal, although not directly involved in the case, should be allowed to make the application in the interest of justice.
"Surely Karpal could be treated as a friend of the court and be allowed to make this application in the interest of justice," he said.
"The deputy prime minister's name for whatever reason keeps cropping up now and then in relation to this case and this would have provided him with a golden opportunity to vindicate himself and lay to rest whatever suspicion that may be lurking around," said Ramakrishnan.
He also said that Balasubramaniam ought to have been recalled to ascertain the veracity of his statement as a witness.
"When these two crucial issues are hanging in the air begging for an answer, how can the court slam the door on this matter?"
3 comments:
Steve Raju Naidu: All you fellas out there are real losers. Shame on you! Now you all come out raining lawsuits on RPK? If indeed you were chastised and victimised, why did it take you all so long to file a suit?
Rosmah had the cheek to say that she has better things to do than to respond to RPK's allegation. So why are you suing him now? Is this going to be another Perwaja Steel, Altantuya or Anwar case?
We Malaysians are not that dumb. With education comes wisdom. Why would RPK put his reputation on the line and make these accusations?
Obviously he has the proof. Let him have his day in court. The way I see it, BN's days are numbered. Good will always triumph over evil.
Ian Teh: The raft of lawsuits brought against Raja Petra, all at the same time, smells of a coordinated effort to stop ‘Malaysia Today' in its tracks.
However, his past experience suggests these wouldn't work.
Neither would most things they try, be they against Raja Petra, Anwar Ibrahim or anyone else exposing the muck that surrounds those in power.
Until and unless the powers-that-be are given a right and clean flush, the rakyat will see these actions - lawsuits, police reports, allegations of sexual impropriety - as what they are, namely tools to silence their accusers.
On Court rejects application to call Najib as witness
Disgusted: To be fair to Najib, counsel should seek the views of the international media and human rights organisations since they are outsiders and their opinions will be unbiased.
They will tell us whether it is necessary or not that Najib take the stand. This judge seems to have made up his mind and can't wait to sentence the arrested three.
CG: As long as the court rejects calling Najib as a witness, the rakyat will assume that Najib is somehow linked to the murder.
There are no two ways to clear the DPM's name. Go to the court. What are you afraid of, Najib? Or rather, is the judge afraid of the DPM?
On Karpal: Najib must testify in Altantuya murder trial
Steve Raju Naidu: Yes, we want Najib in court because we need to know who authorised the release of the C4 explosives? Who deleted the immigration records?
Why were Rosmah's bodyguards involved? What is the connection? Where is the photograph of all of them in Paris?
Why did the PI retract his statements? Why was the prosecution changed at the last minute?
Who interfered with Sirul's first lawyer? Why did he back out? Why was the judge changed?
Why did both the prosecution and defence rise and object what Boomirang had to say about Najib?
A whole load of unanswered questions. You bet we want Najib in court!
On No more waffling, we want the police report NOW
Yap Choi Yin: Let it be said from the very outset that the first information report made by the complainant to the police is the most important document for the defence of the accused person because it frames the charge and therefore limits the evidence that will be allowed in the case.
It is not a joke that if there is no first information report, then it has to be concluded that no report was made, and that being the case, there is no case to meet.
In this respect, public utterances of BN ministers and the PM himself raise very serious suspicion that the police and the Barisan Nasional government are not clean and that the pressure that is brought to bear on Anwar has an ulterior agenda and it is not a good one.
I say to DSAI that he must not give in to police request for his DNA.
The law requires the police to give to an accused person a copy of the first report. That being the law, now that DSAI has been questioned, he is by law entitled to obtain a copy of the report.
I have had a similar experience and can say that the judges, police and the whole apparatus of law enforcement in Malaysia believe they have power to act with impunity.
The case of the Anwar's entitlement to a copy of the first information report and the police's rejection of Anwar's right is a classic case of police abuse of their powers.
The right of Anwar in law is provided for in the rules of evidence and criminal procedure.
Yet, he is still improperly obstructed from enforcing his rights. What does that say of our Malaysian apparatus of law ?
Mickel Raj: In Anwar's case of sodomy, why has Saiful not been arrested and charged for a similar case as he is not a minor?
If its true of what he says, he must be arrested and charged under the same case.
If found guilty, he should be given rotan and jail if the law says so. It would be very strange if he knew the consequences of the law and still reported it, unless he has some thing more rewarding than the jail term he is going to receive. From where?
As I see it, there is no smoke without fire.
Meng: You sometimes wonder how many times the government of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi can shoot themselves in the foot before they realise what is going on.
As in 1998, the many who were apolitical and apathetic became reformasi supporters simply because of the injustice heaped upon Anwar Ibrahim. Even if many did not turun padang, many became sympathisers.
Its happening again, and if the government of Abdullah has to call fresh elections in light of a no- confidence vote and many will simply vote the Pakatan Rakyat into power because of sheer disgust over the way the police and the government are out to get Anwar.
Even if those few who voted BN in March were not convinced then, I believe they will be now. I believe Malays, especially the many conservative ones, will not tolerate the way Anwar was treated during his latest incarceration.
Being stripped, probed and poked before spending the night on a cold cement floor is very inhumane.
If the last elections saw a shift in Indian and Chinese voters, this time we shall see a shift in Malays as well. Good bye to the elitist BN government.
Quoted from Malaysiakini
Raja Petra sued by army couple
Jul 22, 08 4:59pm
A husband-and-wife team of ranking army officers today filed a defamation suit against popular blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin over his statutory declaration which implicated them in the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu.
MCPX
Lt Col Abdul Aziz Buyong and Lt Col Norhayati Hassan filed the suit at the Kuala Lumpur High Court this morning.
The couple is seeking RM1 million in damages each, exemplary damages and other costs. They also sought an injunction to restrain Raja Petra from repeating the alleged defamatory remarks.
Raja Petra had in a statutory declaration affirmed on June 18 implicated the couple as well as Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's wife Rosmah Mansor in the death of Altantuya.
According to the statutory declaration, Aziz had placed C4 on various parts of Altantuya's body while being witnessed by Rosmah and Norhayati.
Social stigma
The couple claim the implication in the murder had caused them undue social stigma and was libelous in nature.
Last week Raja Petra was arrested and charged with criminal defamation under Section 500 of the Penal Code. He is out on a RM2,000 bail, with the trial set to start on Aug 15.
This is not the first time the popular blogger's articles have attracted lawsuits.
On May 27, the Alor Star High Court ordered Raja Petra to pay damages over libel claims by a university head.
University Utara Malaysia and its vice-chancellor Nordin Kardi filed a lawsuit against Raja Petra over an article that alleged Nordin had plagiarised an article.
Source: Malaysiakini
Court rejects bid to call Najib as witness
Jul 23, 08 1:04pm
The Shah Alam High Court today dismissed an application by lawyer Karpal Singh to call Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and two senior police officers to testify as witnesses in Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu's murder trial.
MCPXThe court also similarly dismissed Karpal's application to recall private investigator P Balasubramaniam to the witness stand in the trial.
Justice Mohd Zaki Yasin said that it was not necessary to call in Najib or to recall Balasubramaniam.
"The court will only exercise that when the need arises, before a decision is made," the judge said, adding that "at this moment, these applications are rejected."
The court said that Karpal did not have the legal standing to make the application as he was not a party to the trial.
Karpal told reporters that he might appeal the matter to the Court of Appeal.
The veteran lawyer, who is holding a watching brief for the family of the slain 28-year old Altantuya, had filed a court notice on Monday to compel Najib, Balasubramaniam and two other policemen to testify.
"It is necessary because Najib's evidence is needed for the just decision of this case because of the role that he is said to have played," Karpal had said then.
Karpal, also the DAP chairperson, wanted Balasubramaniam recalled following his sworn statement last month, linking Najib to Altantuya, which he swiftly retracted.
The private eye was the first prosecution witness in the case.
Victim's father frustrated
Balasubramaniam, who went missing after his explosive statements, is in hiding in a neighbouring Southeast Asian country, police have said.
Altantuya was murdered in 2006 and her body blown up with explosives in a remote forest, and Najib's close friend, Abdul Razak Baginda, is on trial for abetting the murder.
Abdul Razak, who told the court that Altantuya was his former lover, had hired Balasubramanian to keep her away from him before she was murdered.
Najib has denied ever meeting her.
Mongolian honorary consul Syed Abdul Rahman AlHabshi, who was present at Wednesday's proceedings, said Altantuya's father, Setev Shaariibuu, expressed his "frustration" over the way the trial was going.
"He is frustrated, he can't see any light at the end of the tunnel. Where is justice?" he told AFP.
The court hearing began on June 18, 2007, but has been caught in a web of complex legal proceedings.
The judge has yet to decide if government lawyers have a case against Abdul Razak and the two policemen.
Aliran: Don't reject because of technicalities
Meanwhile, reform movement Aliran today described the dismissal of Karpal's application as a "great shock to all those praying for justice to prevail".
Aliran president P Ramakrishnan said that Karpal, although not directly involved in the case, should be allowed to make the application in the interest of justice.
"Surely Karpal could be treated as a friend of the court and be allowed to make this application in the interest of justice," he said.
"The deputy prime minister's name for whatever reason keeps cropping up now and then in relation to this case and this would have provided him with a golden opportunity to vindicate himself and lay to rest whatever suspicion that may be lurking around," said Ramakrishnan.
He also said that Balasubramaniam ought to have been recalled to ascertain the veracity of his statement as a witness.
"When these two crucial issues are hanging in the air begging for an answer, how can the court slam the door on this matter?"
source: malaysiakini
Post a Comment