Storify Feed Feedburner Facebook Twitter Flickr Youtube

ROS Lboard

Karpal perplexed by CJ’s letter on ‘copycat’ judge

 | December 30, 2011

Karpal Singh says he wants a royal commission of inquiry and a tribunal set up to investigate the 'copycat' judge and is surprised by CJ's letter to him that there is no case against Malik.

PETALING JAYA:  A perplexed Bukit Gelugor MP and veteran lawyer Karpal Singh has denied that he had asked for “copycat” judge Abdul Malik Ishak to be investigated.

“What I want is a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) and a tribunal set up under Article 125 (3) of the Federal Constitution to enquire into the plagiarism allegations against Malik under the laws that existed in 2000.

“For the record, I have not made any complaint to Chief Justice (Arifin Zakaria) in relation to misconduct on the part of Malik,” he said in a statement today.

Karpal was responding to a letter that he received from Arifin in which the latter stated that Karpal’s complaint had no merit and has been dismissed in accordance with Section 13 (1) of Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009.

According to Karpal, he had written a letter to Malik on Aug 22, indicating his intention to move a motion against him in Parliament under Article 127 for misconduct in relation to the plagiarism (matter).

“There was no reply from Malik. I wrote another letter to him on Sept 29 stating that as there was no response to my allegation, it left me with no alternative but to move a substantive motion against him.

“I also stated that I was extending the letter dated Aug 22 to the Chief Justice and president of the Court of Appeal Md Raus Sharif,” Karpal said.

CJ: Claim has no merit

Arifin, meanwhile, said the complaint linking Malik to plagiarising a Singapore court judgment in 2000 had no merit.

A statement from the Chief Justice’s Office issued by Arifin’s special officer I, Che Wan Zaidi Che Wan Ibrahim, said the decision was reached after investigations and a discussion with Raus.

“The CJ carried out an investigation. Based on his findings and after discussing with the Court of Appeal president in accordance with Section 13(1) of the Judges Code of Ethics 2009, the CJ is of the opinion that Karpal’s allegations of plagiarism by the Appeal Court judge has no merit and the complaint is hereby rejected,” said Che Wan Zaidi.

He said the CJ received a complaint letter dated Sept 29, 2011, from Karpal which claimed that an Appeal Court judge had plagiarised the judgment of a Singapore court judge.

Karpal had been officially informed of the matter in a letter from the CJ’s office, said Che Wan Zaidi.

‘Malik has seven days’

Karpal said that he received a reply from the CJ on Oct 13 asking for “more specific information” in relation to his allegations.

“I responded (to the CJ) by a letter dated Oct 27 stating that the law minister at that time, Rais Yatim, had publicly stated that he knew about the allegations of plagiarism and was aware of the investigations (by the Singapore judiciary),” he said.

Karpal added that on Dec 7, he had again written to the CJ indicating that the parliamentary motions that he put up against Malik had lapsed (on Dec 1) and that “he had no alternative but to seek other measures”.

“Following this, I wrote an open letter dated Dec 27 to Malik (photo) calling upon him to step down or file a suit against me for defamation.

“I gave him seven days to reply, failing which I would take it as a public admission that he was guilty of plagiarism,” said Karpal.

Karpal had in October revealed that the Singapore judiciary had identified Malek as having plagiarised the judgment of Singapore High Court judge GP Selvam in 2000.

Malik was found to have copied Selvam’s judgment on a copyright case while serving as Johor High Court judge in 2000.

Karpal had earlier in Parliament called for Malik’s immediate resignation, saying it would save the Malaysian judiciary from further embarrassment. Malik is currently a Court of Appeal judge.

Also read:

Karpal tightens noose on copycat judge

Karpal: Copycat judge should resign


Comments

Readers are required to have a valid Facebook account to comment on this story. We welcome your opinions to allow a healthy debate. We want our readers to be responsible while commenting and to consider how their views could be received by others. Please be polite and do not use swear words or crude or sexual language or defamatory words. FMT also holds the right to remove comments that violate the letter or spirit of the general commenting rules.

The views expressed in the contents are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of FMT.

Comments