MORE PICS – Day 10 & 9 RCI – Eusoff Chin Denies Lingam’s Gifts; Lingam: Lazar aspired to be Appeal Court Judge; Anwar & Company No need to testify
Relationship With Lingam One Of Judge And Lawyer, Says Ahmad Fairuz
ABOVE: Ahmad Fairus spotted on Day 10 RCI testified video clip purportedly linking his name in the appointment of judges was a slander but he did not do anything to clear his name.Relationship With Lingam One Of Judge And Lawyer
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 28 (Bernama) -- Former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim testifying today before the Royal Commission Inquiry into a controversial video clip about alleged judicial corruption, said his relationship Datuk V.K.Lingam was one of judge and lawyer.
Ahmad Fairuz, 66, said he came to know Lingam when the latter appeared before him in court cases. Ahmad Fairuz said he also knew corporate figure Tan Sri Vincent Tan and Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor (since he was appointed Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department) but contact with them was limited to official functions.
Questioned by Datuk Azmi Ariffin, the head of the commercial crime division in the Attorney-General's Chambers, who is assisting the inquiry, Ahmad Fairuz said he could not be sure if the man talking in the tape was Lingam as he had only met the latter a few times in court and once at the residence of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
However, Ahmad Fairuz agreed that the man looked like Lingam.
Questioned further by Azmi, Ahmad Fairuz denied that there had been a conspiracy between him, Lingam, Tengku Adnan and Vincent Tan to ensure he was promoted as the Federal Court president and thereafter Chief Justice.
Asked by Azmi, if he knew the subject matter of the video clip, Ahmad Fairuz said he was not able to tell as the conversation kept breaking.He said he was shown the video clip by his former secretary on Nov 11 last year. Ahmad Fairuz retired as Chief Justice on
He was then shown the video-clip, the sixth time it was presented in the course of the inquiry.
When Azmi resumed questioning him, Ahmad Fairuz said that he had never telephoned Lingam on
Azmi: Did you at any time ask for help from Tengku Adnan and Vincent Tan through Lingam to confirm your promotion as Federal Court president?
Ahmad Fairuz: Never.
Azmi: Did you at anytime telephone Lingam to thank him because you were promoted as Chief Judge of
Ahmad Fairuz: Never and the fact is not correct.
On the part in the clip where it was mentioned Tan Sri Abdul Malek Ahmad, who was then Federal Court president, would be passed over for the Chief Justice's post as the latter was anti-Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad (the prime minister then), Ahmad Fairuz replied he did not know.
To a question by his counsel Salehuddin Saidin, he stressed that he did not have Lingam's telephone number and vice versa.
Salehuddin: Was it you who was talking to the Indian man (in the clip)?
Ahmad Fairuz: No.
Salehuddin: As such, the claim by the man that he was talking to you is not true?
Ahmad Fairuz: Yes.
On a separate issue, Ahmad Fairuz said that he was appointed by Tan Sri Anuar Zainal Abidin (the Chief Judge of
Wee is also involved in the inquiry and is representing Lingam's younger brother, V.K.Thirunama.
Questioned further by Salehuddin,Ahmad Fairuz said he made the decision to reject the petition by Wee based on the facts and the law.= == = == = ==
Allegations Made After I Failed To Give Him Bungalow, Says Lingam
He said that when he did not give Thirunama a bungalow, a Mercedez Benz car, a lot of money and educate his children, the latter threatened to make his life miserable and said that he had lodged two police reports with the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA).
Lingam said Thirunama's counsel, M.Manoharan, called him and told him that Thirunama had lodged two police reports and asked him whether he wanted to pay the money to his brother. He did not want to pay because all the allegations made by Thirunama were not true and the ACA had already settled the investigation, he said, adding: "My brother, Thirunama, had physic mental problem." Questioned by counsel Wee Choo Keong, for Thirunama, Lingam stressed that he bought a house in Seapark for RM21,000 in 1972 and all his siblings lived together. He said Thirunama worked for him from February to June 1996 as an administrative worker and his job was to photocopy documents and assist in binding documents.
"He only worked for two hours a day. He came in about
At this juncture, commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor told Wee to confine his questions to the relevant portion allowed by the commission but Wee persisted and commissioner Datuk Mahadev Shankar had to remind him not to ask irrelevant questions.
When Wee still asked irrelevant questions after a 10-minute break, Shankar said he would take over the questioning regarding the portion in the statement made by Thirunama. Referred to the statement that he and Thirunama went to former chief justice Tun Eusoff Chin's house in early 1995 to send a few files, Lingam said it was not true.
He also denied the part which said that that he intended to purchase a house for Eusoff in October 1995. He said it was also not true that he had instructed Thirunama to deliver to Eusoff a briefcase with a brown envelope in it, a ladies handbag and a man wallet, all of which were fr om
Lingam was also not sure that between January and March 1996, he had given ThirunamaRanjit Singh on whether he or his wife owned a BMW car with plate number WDN 788 and whether he knew RM1,200 to purchase a handphone from Mutiara Telecommunication in Jalan Sultan Ismail for Eusoff. He also answered in the negative to questions by Malaysian Bar representative that Eusoff or any Eusoff family member was the owner of the car.
Conversation In Video Clip Is A Slander, Says Fairuz
Former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim described the conversation in the video clip purportedly linking his name in the appointment of judges was a slander. Ahmad Fairuz, who testified before the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the controversial video clip, said he did not know why the man in the video clip, who was said to be lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam, had linked his name in the conversation and slandered him.
"I don't know why he (Lingam) did it, may be he was merely trying to impress other people there that he knew the prime minister and other dignitaries, and that he knew the Chief Judge of
Ahmad Fairuz said he first came to know about the video clip through his former secretary on the same day that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim made the announcement to expose the video clip on Nov 19, last year. He said that in the afternoon of that day (Nov 19), his former secretary had given him two articles obtained from the Malaysiakini website entitled "Video Link CJ To Judge Fixing Scandal" and "Transcript Of Lingam Conversation With Ahmad Fairuz".
When questioned by Salehuddin whether he had taken any action after reading the articles and transcript, Ahmad Fairuz said he had read the two documents repeatedly and on the following day, he had drafted a letter addressed to the prime minister, deputy prime minister and minister in the prime minister's department (Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz) to explain his views and position on the video clip. "I chose to send a letter to the three individuals as they were members of the Executive Body where I, as head of the Judiciary, must inform the Executive Body on the allegations against me and what my stand was."
Ahmad Fairuz was later shown the letters he had sent to the prime minister, deputy prime minister and minister in the prime minister's department (all three letters carried the same contents and had the Malaysiakini articles and transcripts attached) which among others stated "Following is my explanation, I had never talked to "V.K Lingam".
Replying to Salehuddin's question why he wrote the name Lingam within inverted commas, Ahmad Fairuz said it was because he was not sure who was talking on the telephone in the video clip and he could not see clearly (the person in the video clip) at that time. "In my explanation, I had also stated that I had never made such conversation. The contents in the transcript of the conversation were allegations that Lingam was talking to me on the topic, and I'm saying that they were all untrue. "The recording of the conversation in the video clip was merely a monologue because my voice was not heard in the conversation and only Lingam's voice was heard," he said. Ahmad Fairuz said that in his explanation in the letter, he said there were no indications that could link him to the video clip because his name was not mentioned as the other party speaking to Lingam on the telephone.
Asked by Salehuddin whether it had occurred to him to lodge a police report or to take legal action for slander, Ahmad Fairuz said: "I had never thought of doing so because the Malaysiakini article had already mentioned that there was a party (Parti Keadilan Rakyat) which would lodge a report with the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) and also lodge a complaint with the Bar Council. "In the newspapers published subsequently, no reference was made to my name but only that of Lingam who was reported to be conversing with a senior judge, therefore, if I were to lodge a police report, it would be misconstrued that I was the senior judge.
"I did not take any legal action for libel because I was not certain who was slandering me and that the ACA was also carrying out an investigation. So, it was not nice for me to take such action," he said.-- MORE
= == = = = =
= ==== = = == = and from theSUN
Ahmad Fairuz: It was a fabrication
R. Surenthira Kumar and Llew-Ann Phang
KUALA LUMPUR (Jan 28, 2008): Former Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim told the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the controversial video clip today that he thought the video clip content was a fabrication and that Datuk V.K Lingam was trying to impress the people around him, when the recording was made. Ahmad Fairuz, 66, was the 14th witness to give evidence before the Commission, after his predecessor Tun Mohamed Eusoff Chin had left the stand.
"I immediately thought that it (the video) was defamatory. Two things crossed my mind. First, that it may be a fabrication and the other person speaking in the video clip wanted to impress someone or several people who were there when the video was made," he replied to questions by his counsel Salehuddin Saidin.
Ahmad Fairuz told the Commission that his former secretary informed him of the video clip and he watched it on the computer last Sept 19, but the video was choppy and he could not be sure that the person portrayed in the clip was Lingam.The courtroom also heard that his secretary handed him two Malaysiakini documents - the first titled "Video links CJ to judge fixing scandals" and the second "Transcript of Lingam's conversation with Ahmad Fairuz". "I read both documents several times the next day and proceeded to draft a letter.
"I issued letters to the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department to express my opinion and position on the video," Ahmad Fairuz said, adding that he attached both documents as appendix to his correspondence.
"I sent the three letters because the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister in Prime Minister's Department are representatives in the executive. I am the head of the Judiciary. Therefore, I need to inform the chief of the executive of the allegations (made) against me and my position on it," he said, when asked why he wrote to the three personalities.
On why he referred to the conversation as a "monologue" in his letters, Ahmad Fairuz replied: "My voice was not heard in the video. Only Datuk V.K Lingam's voice is heard."
Salehuddin also asked Ahmad Fairuz why he did not lodge a police report or did not take up any defamation suit against any parties.
To this, Ahmad Fairuz replied: "I did not think of filing a police report as the second last paragraph in the first appendix that the party (Parti Keadilan Rakyat which made the expose) will lodge a report with the ACA (Anti-Corruption Agency) and a complaint with the Bar Council."
"Secondly, newspapers on
"If I make a report, it would be read as me admitting to be the senior judge. I had no intention to file a defamation suit as I was not sure of who was defaming me and ACA would be taking action (in the meantime).
"I must ascertain that it was defamation, that it was against me and then decide if I should take action or not," Ahmad Fairuz said.
He also said he declined to make comments to the media so as not to disrupt investigations.
On why he did not contact Lingam to express his disappointment on the matter, he said: "Nanti bangkit fitnah yang lain pula (It might cause another defamation). I did not want allegations to arise that I contacted him to persuade him to deny saying that, or even otherwise." "I was the Chief Justice of Malaya at the time. There was no reason to call him."
Ahmad Fairuz, in his testimony which lasted about an hour, denied having Lingam's contact numbers and gave evidence that he had only met Lingam at "one or two court cases" and at another occasion while visiting the late Datin Seri Endon Mahmood in the prime minister's home in Putrajaya.
Ahmad Fairuz denied having any knowledge of a meeting between Lingam, Tan Sri Vincent Tan and Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor for the appointment and elevation of judges, and neither did he agree to having any knowledge of conspiring between himself, Lingam, Tan and Tengku Adnan to ensure his appointment as Court of Appeal President and then as Chief Justice of Malaya.
= == = == = ==
Eusoff Denies Receiving Presents From Lingam
ABOVE: Eusoff Chin on Day 10 RCI
He said Lingam had never sought his assistance to lobby or broker the appointment of judges after he (Eusoff) retired.
= == = == = ==an another Lingam story?
Lazar Wants To Become Court Of Appeal Judge, Says Lingam
ABOVE: Lingam as usual smiling to newsmen on arrival on Day 10 RCI
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 28 (Bernama) -- Lawyer Datuk V.K.Lingam today revealed that Malaysian Bar representative Robert Lazar had approach him to seek assistance to meet former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as he wanted to be appointed as Court of Appeal Judge.
Lingam said at that time Lazar was a lawyer and he wanted to be appointed straight away as the Court of Appeal Judge without being appointed as Judicial Commissioner or High Court Judge beforehand as required.
"Since I was handling Mirzan Mahathir's case in a civil suit, while Lazar represented the other party, Lazar approached me not to see Eusoff Chin to seek assistance for him (Lazar) to be appointed as Court of Appeal Judge, but to speak to Dr Mahathir instead.
= ==== = = == =
No Need To Call Anwar To Testify In Inquiry For Now
The five-member panel headed by Haidar however allowed the application by Lingam's younger brother, Thirunama Karasu, to take the witness stand but his evidence will only be confined to certain issues.
The proceedings were held in camera to ensure that allegations which have have nothing to do with the video clip would not be included as evidence.
M. Puravalen, counsel for Anwar, and Wee Chee Keong for Thirunama Karasu, had submitted that the testimonies of their clients were relevant to the terms and conditions of the inquiry.
The inquiry, which enters its 10th day, was set up to, among others, ascertain the authenticity of the video clip, the truth of its content, identify the persons in the clip and recommend any appropriate action to be taken against those involved, if there is any misconduct.
= == = == = == = == == = == = =
Commission To Decide Today Whether To Call Anwar As Witness
Among others, the inquiry is being held to determine the authenticity of the video clip purportedly showing Lingam brokering judicial appointments over the telephone with a senior judge.
= == = == Just ask these so called experts to show 1 sec of the Clip (with 30 frames) to illustrate which frame has been "doctored" or "superimposed" with either images or sound instead oa arguing over methodology.
DAY 9
Day 9 – RCI; Morning testimony was in Camera . Open in afternoon and the Video Clip was again stated as authentic. There was a silly question about the “age of the Video Clip by analyzing the Camera”. Easier & Better to check the Model the Sony Camera was released in the market and you can tell if the Clip age is in the year 2001 as the recorder Gwo Burne mentioned he got the camera two weeks before he corded the Clip
Video Clip Is Authentic, Says Witness
Lingam video clip is authentic, says expert
Llew-Ann Phang theSUN
KUALA LUMPUR (Jan 25, 2008): CyberSecurity Sdn Bhd (forensics digital division) senior analyst Mohd Zabri Adil Talib maintained at the Royal Commission proceedings today that the recording purportedly of Datuk V.K. Lingam is authentic. Mohd Zabri, the fifth witness, took to the stand after the Commission had conducted more than six hours of its proceedings in camera.
Lingam’s counsel R.Thayalan grilled Mohd Zabri on his qualifications to carry out the voice identification, how the analysis was done on the eight minute and 14-minute recordings, and the tools used. Thayalan contended that the tools used by Mohd Zabri were not "geared specifically for voice analysis" to which Mohd Zabri disagreed with the statement. Thayalan said he would make an application to the Commission to call for two video and speaker identification experts to explain that the "methods used – by international standards – were not correct".
To this Mohd Zabri reacted saying that CyberSecurity’s laboratory used "the best international standards and standard operating procedures". Thayalan maintained that his experts informed him that an analysis can only be done from the original source. "We have evidence that this video was taken from websites," he added. Commision chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor then interjected pointing out that the proceedings had seen two witnesses saying Lingam was the person in the video.
Thayalan again said he took the stand that the authentication can only be done from the original source, prompting Haidar to ask Thayalan to put a question to Mohd Zabri if he thought the analysis can only be done with the original copy of the clip. In his reply, Mohd Zabri said: "No, the evidence is sufficient and authentic enough for analysis." Later, Commissioner Datuk Mahadev Shankar asked Mohd Zabri to explain what he had said about the practices of the laboratory for the record. "On analysis of multimedia forensics, we follow the best practices in international standards whereby the equipment used in analysing the speaker identity is validated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology which is an organisation that standardise and validates forensic tools," Mohd Zabri said.
Thayalan later referred the Commission to his application for the two witnesses to give evidence before the Royal Commission, to which Mahadev asked: "Without knowing what they are going to say, how are we going to agree to call them?"
To which Thayalan said he will get a copy of the report if the commission wished.Haidar then said he would tell Thayalan the decision on Monday (Jan 28)B .efore proceedings adjourned, Mahadev verified with Thayalan on his aim to bring his two witnesses.
"If I understood your line of questioning to the witness, your experts are saying that only with sophisticated, proper equipment can we be 100% sure that it is your client but you’re not suggesting that the witnesses’ conclusion is wrong, right?" Mahadev asked, to which Thayalan agreed.
On Monday the Commission will also make a decision on submission of witnesses and evidence by counsel Wee Choo Keong who is acting for Lingam’s brother Thirunama Karasu and counsel M. Puravelan who is representing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Sim Tze Tzin and Sivarasa Rasiah.
= == = ==
tests," he said. To a question from Salehuddin Saidin, counsel for former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim who has been implicated in the video clip, he said that after analysing the video camera, he could not establish the age of the recording. The inquiry is to ascertain, among others, the authenticity of the video clip purportedly featuring lawyer V.K.Lingam brokering judicial appointments over the phone.
= == = == = === = =Coming next post- Anwar’s 3rd Clip
Anwar Has Third Video Clip On Brokering Of Judges
Earlier, Haidar questioned why Anwar did not forward the tape earlier. He said Anwar should have not disclosed the tape in stages as the commission had a time-frame to complete its work. Puravelan answered that the tape only came into Anwar's possession during the weekend. Haidar then said the commission would look at the tape to see whether it was relevant or not. Another commissioner, Datuk Mahadev Shankar, then said: "The previous video clip was broadcast to the world but now he wants to share it with us (the commission) and not anybody else."
Anwar had released an 8-minute and a 14-minute video clip purportedly showing lawyer Datuk V.K.Lingam brokering judicial appointments over the phone with a top judge. The inquiry is to ascertain the authenticity of the clip, among others.
Anwar’s website also contained a transcript of the latest segment.
Lingam: The constitution judges said the constitution said, in the opinion of the prime minister he recommend. Who the prime minister recommend?
So you are Dzaiddin, you are chief justice, you recommend 10 names, I consent, I said I want these 15 names, can’t do anything. He recommend to rulers, rulers only consulted, not approve, only consult. You know?
[Voice off-camera]: Because if it goes up to the Court of Appeal…
Lingam: Now Dzaiddin wants to come through the PM because he wants his Tun-ship. So…he doing everything to please the PM lah, but he recommended five judges, three…three approved, which is Tun Eusoff Chin’s men, two not Eusoff Chin’s men which we objected. I prepared the report and rejected… but he wants to appeal again lah.
[Voice off-camera]: Can he appeal?
Lingam: He can appeal lah, but will be rejected lah.
[Voice off-camera]: I never know appointment can be rejected you know?
Lingam: No, recommendation can be rejected. The PM shall recommend so and so, after consulting so and so. So, PM suppose to consult Loh Mui Fah before he recommends. So Loh Mui Fah recommend 10 names, he in fact can say I disagree with your 10 names, I recommend Gurm…Lingam and so and so. Nothing you can do. You are only…you are supposed to be consulted, not to be approved. You see the point or not? The constitution said consult. I suppose to consult my father before I marry, I consulted him, he disagreed but still I married!
[Voice off-camera]: Because that is not final, ah.
Lingam: Right, consult is to discuss. That’s all. But if I must get my father’s approval before married, then different. Approval different from consult.
[Voice off-camera]: So, who is the lord president now?
Lingam: Now chief justice Dzaiddin.
[Voice off-camera]: Dzaiddin
Lingam: But between you and me. We have taken Dzaiddin for dinner three times.
[Voice off-camera]: Three times already.
Lingam: And we have given him the most expensive gift. Don’t ask about it lah. I have given him and Vincent Tan has given him. So, he also cannot attack us. Tomorrow we go say we give you this, this, this. He cannot go and say you are a agent. Correct or not? So, he is neither here nor there lah. That’s all.
[Voice off-camera]: But… Chief Justice..
Lingam: But in the court when I argue with him. He said, Datuk Lingam you said you will take one hour. I said, my Lord, it is only 50 minutes, I got another 10 minutes. But…I appreciate. Thank you, thank you… He is very nice with me, very polite with me. I have been sending cakes every Hari Raya. Vincent has been sending. He can’t go and say he is very clean, correct or not?
[Voice off-camera]: But then he is…
Lingam: But he is playing his game lah. He got the job, that’s it. Now, September he is finished that’s all. Make sure he is not extended.
[Voice off-camera]: But, he may ask for extension.
Lingam: He is hoping… he told somebody that he likes the job very much. Then he likes…Let him dream lah.
[Voice off-camera]: Above him is the Lord President?
Lingam: He is the number one man, Dzaiddin.
[Voice off-camera]: Whose the Lord President?
Lingam: He is called… those days called lord president, now called chief justice, federal court.
[Voice off-camera]: Oh… it is the same title.
Lingam: Number two President Court of Appeal, that Wan Adnan, my personal friend. He was sick. Nobody knows he is close to me. Right, in fact, he never knew his name is going up until I told him. Then number three, Ahmad Fairuz, Chief Judge Malaya. Ahmad Fairuz is going to be acting, now acting…number two. Right?
So, next minute, even Raja Aziz said he is going to be the next top job. He is…definitely number one lah.
So, he told me I leave it all to you and you must help me and all…I said I’ll arrange for you to meet Tengku Adnan, Vincent and meet with PM lah…
But this bugger is sometimes a bit scared. Ah…I must play shadow from the behind. Nobody should know I know you. Then you can help more. But people, see you know more, like Eusoff Chin, because I met him in
Correct or not? Unfortunate.
[Voice off-camera]: Then, in your…then they said you have taken photograph with him holidaying in…huh…huh…
Lingam: But unfortunately, I didn’t know. The worst thing I didn’t know Eusoff Chin put his hand like that! Alamak…so…I also didn’t know about it. What to do?
[Voice off-camera]: Then… then…
Lingam: Do you know, today
I told my wife to call…[unclear]…
[phone rings]…
Lingam: The constitution judges said the constitution said, in the opinion of the prime minister he recommend. Who the prime minister recommend? So you are Dzaiddin, you are chief justice, you recommend 10 names, I consent, I said I want these 15 names, can’t do anything. He recommend to rulers, rulers only consulted, not approve, only consult. You Know?
[Voice off-camera]: Because if it goes up to the Court of Appeal…
Lingam: Now Dzaiddin wants to come through the PM because he wants his Tun-ship. So…he doing everything to please the PM lah, but he recommended five judges, three…three approved, which is Tun Eusoff Chin’s men, two not Eusoff Chin’s men which we objected. I prepared the report and rejected… but he wants to appeal again lah.
[Voice off-camera]: Can he appeal?
Lingam: He can appeal lah, but will be rejected lah.
[Voice off-camera]: I never know appointment can be rejected you know?
Lingam: No, recommendation can be rejected. The PM shall recommend so and so, after consulting so and so. So, PM suppose to consult Loh Mui Fah before he recommends. So Loh Mui Fah recommend 10 names, he in fact can say I disagree with your 10 names, I recommend Gurm…Lingam and so and so. Nothing you can do. You are only…you are supposed to be consulted, not to be approved. You see the point or not? The constitution said consult. I suppose to consult my father before I marry, I consulted him, he disagreed but still I married!
[Voice off-camera]: Because that is not final, ah.
Lingam: Right, consult is to discuss. That’s all. But if I must get my father’s approval before married, then different. Approval different from consult.
[Voice off-camera]: So, who is the lord president now?
Lingam Now chief justice Dzaiddin.
[Voice off-camera]: Dzaiddin…
Lingam: But between you and me. We have taken Dzaiddin for dinner three times.
[Voice off-camera]: Three times already.
Lingam: And we have given him the most expensive gift. Don’t ask about it lah. I have given him and Vincent Tan has given him. So, he also cannot attack us. Tomorrow we go say we give you this this this. He cannot go and say you are a agent. Correct or not? So, he is neither here nor there lah. That’s all.
[Voice off-camera]: But… Chief Justice..
Lingam: But in the court when I argue with him. He said, Datuk Lingam you said you will take one hour. I said, my Lord, it is only 50 minutes, I got another 10 minutes. But…I appreciate. Thank you, thank you… He is very nice with me, very polite with me. I have been sending cakes every hari raya. Vincent has been sending. He can’t go and say he is very clean, correct or not?
[Voice off-camera]: But then he is…
Lingam: But he is playing his game lah. He got the job, that’s it. Now, September he is finished that’s all. Make sure he is not extended.
[Voice off-camera]: But, he may ask for extension.
Lingam: He is hoping… he told somebody that he likes the job very much. Then he likes…Let him dream lah.
[Voice off-camera]: Above him is the Lord President?
Lingam: He is the number one man, Dzaiddin.
[Voice off-camera]: Whose the Lord President?
Lingam: He is called… those days called lord president, now called chief justice, federal court.
[Voice off-camera]: Oh… it is the same title.
Lingam: Number two President Court of Appeal, that Wan Adnan, my personal friend. He was sick. Nobody knows he is close to me. Right, in fact, he never knew his name is going up until I told him. Then number three, Ahmad Fairuz, Chief Judge Malaya. Ahmad Fairuz is going to be acting, now acting…number two. Right? So, next minute, even Raja Aziz said he is going to be the next top job. He is…definitely number one lah. So, he told me I leave it all to you and you must help me and all…I said I’ll arrange for you to meet Tengku Adnan, Vincent and meet with PM lah…But this bugger is sometimes a bit scared. Ah…I must play shadow from the behind. Nobody should know I know you. Then you can help more. But people, see you know more, like Eusoff Chin, because I met him in
[Voice off-camera]: Then, in your…then they said you have taken photograph with him holidaying in…huh…huh…
Lingam: But unfortunately, I didn’t know. The worst thing I didn’t know Eusoff Chin put his hand like that! Alamak…so…I also didn’t know about it. What to do?
[Voice off-camera]: Then… thenLingam: Do you know, today
I told my wife to call…[unclear]… [phone rings]
Lingam: Hello…Joe Ah…!
posted by multidimid at 6:43 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment