Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Justice Chin strikes back..

Reproduced herewith, in verbatim, an article posted by The Malaysian Bar Council website;

Justice Ian Chin lashes out at the "serving judge" and Dr. Mahathir

Posted by Webmaster (Malaysian Bar Council)
Wednesday, 25 June 2008 03:15pm

Justice Ian ChinIn notes of proceedings of Wong Hua Seh v Abang Mohd. Porkan bin Haji Abang Budiman & Ding Kuong Hing on 24 June 12008 reproduced in full below (unedited), Justice Datuk Ian Chin lashed out at the "serving judge" mentioned in the News Straits Times report on 11 June 2008 and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad:

On the "serving judge"

"I can think of one reason and I can think of one judge (who is still serving) who will do that. This takes me back to 1996 or some other year, where Dr Mahathir had another group picture taken with the judges. To my disgust, this judge quickly planted himself behind the chair where Dr. Mahathir was to sit and when Dr Mahathir was about to be seated this judge declared: “Sir, I am always behind you.” It was disgusting even as a joke as it reduced the dignity of the office of a judge since the statement panders for endearment to Dr Mahathir. Since then I have always pondered whether this judge really meant what that statement would ordinarily convey which is that he will forever support Dr. Mahathir and to mean also, since it was made by a judge, he will decide what he thinks what Dr. Mahathir would like the verdict to be and worse still when told to."

On Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

"Dr. Mahathir, by waving the supposed police report the way he did, lent support to the general held view that this prime minister kept a docket on everyone useful but with a skeleton in their cupboard so that he can manipulate then on pain of disclosing the skeleton. I thought only the STASI of the then Communist East Germany do such a thing but then it was done for the benefit of the state not for an individual. In my view he is trying to exploit this general believe to wave that supposed police report to get the public to believe that I have committed something unlawful which he is privy to and which the public is not unaware so that my integrity could be put under suspicion to make what I have revealed unbelievable. Let me declare to the public that I am as clean as a whistle and my life is an open book."

Read more here and read also Somebody took the jam out of Ian Chin’s donuts!

And all Che Det wants is his day in court. Here



What being said by Che Det, among other things:

3. What he did not reveal is that there is a police report against him for breaches of Judge's Code of Ethics in hearing a case in which he has a personal interest. He presided on a case involving Dato Syed Kechik without revealing that he believed Syed Kechik was responsible for detaining his father and brother 20 years before.

30. It will be interesting to see whether the Government would set up a tribunal to examine the charges against Ian Chin J.

31. I suspect that it will not. And so this judge who obviously breached The Judges Code of Ethics by "being a judge in his own cause" will simply get away with his unethical behaviour while presiding over a case.

32. The public should question how a person such as Ian Chin J should have been recommended to become a judge. I cannot remember recommending him. He is a disgrace to the judiciary and to the legal profession.

33. Now Chin has changed his accusation of "veiled threat" to "the former premier did not say he would remove judges through a tribunal in those exact words but conveyed the threat by "dropping words to that effect here and there". I wonder what the words are. He will now be thinking and cooking up more stories.

34. This reflects the character of the man who presides over our courts and dispenses "justice". He makes use of his position as a judge and the courts to take revenge for alleged actions against members of his family.

1 comment:

UMgrads said...

Something is seriously wrong with the judge, I'm sorry to say. Channeling personal issues through court cases he handles. I am not a lawyer but I know this should not be the way. My two cents.