Statement by Ms. Jayanthi L.G Naidu, former secretary of Datuk VK Lingam
10 November 2009
I had heard in the media the announcement by Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz that the MACC had cleared Datuk VK Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin of any wrong doing or corruption, I also read that the MACC had closed the case on the investigation into the New Zealand holiday taken together by Datuk VK Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin in 1994 because they could not locate a key witness.
As for the inability to locate a key witness as alleged, I have been contactable at all times. The ACA/MACC officers have at all times been able to contact me earlier for my statements. After the press announcement by Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz reported on 23.10.09, I called the MACC and asked who was the key witness that they were looking for. They were unable to answer me.
I gave a full statement in 1998 regarding this New Zealand trip to the former ACA ( now the MACC ), some of which I repeated in the Royal Commission proceedings. After the Royal Commission proceedings, I gave another statement to the MACC in the presence of my lawyer En Amer Hamzah Arshad. Amongst the matters I told the ACA/,MACC and the Royal Commission were that VK Lingam and Eusoff Chin and families’ holiday trip to New Zealand in 1994 was planned and paid for by VK Lingam. On the instruction of VK Lingam, I had assisted to book and pay for their air tickets in accordance with their itinerary. The documents and holiday photographs have all been given to the ACA and the Royal Commission.
In my evidence before the Royal Commission, I also described how the judgment delivered by Datuk Mohktar Sidin in the Vincent Tan v MGG Pillai libel case was written in the office of VK Lingam. I was amongst the various staff present in the office assisting in the process by photostating and looking for the cases. The written draft judgment with corrections in VK Lingam’s handwriting and other related documents was given to the Royal Commission and ACA.
I am also aware of a few other incidents in VK Lingam’s office where VK Lingam (and other lawyers) have also written or assisted the writing of draft judgments which included such cases like Ayer Molek where he also appeared as counsel for one of the parties. I was aware that the judgments were being drafted as I was present in the office but not assisting directly.
On the instructions of VK Lingam, I have at least on three occasions withdrawn large sums of money (accompanied by a bodyguard) between RM100,000 to RM300,000 which I then wrapped in gift boxes with the understanding that they were to be hand delivered by others to individual judges. On one occasion, I saw one of these money boxes being placed together with a box containing a cake to be delivered to a judge.
I also told the Royal Commission that in 1998 after I had given my statement, the ACA officers told me then that they could not proceed with the case because it involved top government people.
Semalam seharian saya di parlimen, mendengar para menteri menjawab persoalan dan penghujahan mantap dari ahli-ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat. Tampak berani dan membanggakan sekali apabila ahli parlimen Pakatan bingkas menafikan jawapan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri; bahawa SPRM tidak menemui sebarang salah laku VK Lingam dan mantan Ketua Hakim Negara, walhasil adik Lingam sendiri membuat pengakuan. Dalih kononnya saksi utama tidak dapat dikesan pastinya tidak mampu diterima akal sihat. Bukan kah kita sering angkuh mendabik dada pasukan polis negara antara yang terbaik seantero dunia?
Tambahan lagi jawapan menteri menggesa kita memisahkan di antara prinsip moral dan undang-undang! Alahai tidakkah ini menyebabkan rakyat hilang rasa hormat, bukan sahaja kepada institusi kehakiman, bahkan juga institusi Parlimen itu sendiri. Kita masakan lupa ungkapan “korek, korek, korek.”
Malamnya saya menghadiri acara anjuran Kerajaan Negeri Selangor di Dewan MPAJ. Program diskusi belanjawan ini merupakan susulan dari yang berlangsung di Dewan MPPJ tempoh hari. Turut serta Dr Tan Seng Giaw, Dr Hatta Ramli dan Sdr. Yaakob Sapari, Ahli Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan Negeri Selangor. Saya berpeluang mengupas dua karya ahli ekonomi klasik dan pemuka Pencerahan Skotlandia itu; Wealth of Nations dan Theory of Moral Sentiments. Jarang sekali wacana ekonomi di rantau ini membandingkan kedua-dua karya tersebut bagi mendapat gambaran jelas pemikiran Adam Smith, seorang filasuf yang sering disalah anggap.
Harus diingat Smith merupakan seorang ahli falsafah moral di Universiti Edinburgh, karya awalnya Theory of Moral Sentiments, berusaha mengungkapkan betapa kesejahteraan masyarakat juga dimungkinkan akibat dari kehendak perseorangan. Beliau tidak menolak kesejahteraan juga berpunca dari rasa hormat dan berbakti kepada masyarakat. Adam Smith memberi perhatian untuk merungkaikan kebejatan monopoli kerajaan dan makarnya dengan saudagar-saudagar kaya. Bagi beliau itulah kerosakan yang membinasakan. Asalkan mereka berkomplot, ianya membuahkan hasil yang tidak sihat sekaligus merugikan rakyat.
Nah! Pemerhatian berabad usianya masih mengesankan dan memberi pengajaran. Perhatikan sahaja Laporan Audit Negara, skandal seperti Landasan Keretapi Berkembar bakal menelan sejumlah RM 1.4 billion akibat dari kegelojohan dan ketamakan. Manakala skandal PKFZ, sekiranya diteruskan juga, akan menelan wakg rakyat bernilai hampir RM 12 billion! Makar sebegini, demi kepentingan keluarga dan tembolok taulan malah menyingkirkan negara jauh dari pemulihan apatah lagi pertumbuhan.
Sayugia menjadi peringatan jangan semberono menukilkan angka, ketika Dato’ Sri Najib beriya-iya membuat kenyataan negara akan mencatatkan pertumbuhan sekitar 9 %, sekonyong konyong memperbetulkannya dengan menyatakan pertumbuhan hanya sekitar 6%. Jangan sesekali bersambil lewa mengurus ekonomi negara! Sedangkan Bank Dunia melaporkan, Keluaran Dalam Negara Kasar(KDNK) akan mengalami penguncupan sekitar 2.3 dan hanya pada tahun hadapan mencatatkan pertumbuhan sekitar 4.1%.
ANWAR IBRAHIM
No comments:
Post a Comment