I was floored by the amounts of “yes” answers. It looks like I’ll have to dig up the old video cam and scratch pad and be a man and keep my word. What was that saying again about being careful what you ask for?
I’m assuming that those who are following the case are relatively well informed of the cast and supporting characters, So here goes the first installment:
Today’s Star, Feb 18
Counsel appearing for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Datuk Seri Shafee Abdullah explained that a revision was not like an appeal and once its done, even the A-G does not have the power to withdraw it.
The Star, Feb 17
Counsel Datuk Seri Shafee Abdullah, who is representing the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission said that although the Teoh familys proposed application for a review was urgent and serious, he was concerned about the time frame as the commission had only three months to conclude the inquiry.
Shafie also said there were British precedent of sitting judges presiding over Commissions of Inquiry and Tribunals.
The Sun Daily, Feb 17
However, this was refuted by Datuk Seri Mohd Shafee Abdullah, who is acting for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. Mohd Shafee argued that any postponement would delay the inquiry, and that an appeal was sure to happen regardless of which party won the judicial review.
He said such hearings would push the commission hearings back by up to three months, and that any evidence in question could be disqualified should the High Court allow a review.
“There has always been a retired judge as chairman and that ought to be the position. That matter is compounded in our case as Mr Chairman is a sitting Federal Court judge,” he said.
The Sun Daily, Feb 17
This position was refuted by Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) counsel Datuk Seri Mohd Shafee Abdullah, who argued that withdrawing the revision is out of the A-G’s hands.
Shafee said it is left in the hands of the High Court to decide the merits of a revision.
"It is a process of invocation of the powers of revision, it is never our right. So nobody can ask for a withdrawal of a revision because it is now with the court," said Shafee.
Shafee, who defended the independence of the three officers, pointed out that the parties which withdrew did so out of their own free will.
The RCI should proceed, should’nt it? The Malaysia public has a right to know the facts of the case, at the very least to decide for themselves what actually happened to TBH. The withdrawals by his family & the Selangor government should not affect the ongoing RCI
It’s has been a such week of drama. So much of media attention has been on walkouts and withdrawals that it seems that several participants of the RCI are bent on derailing the process and at the very least, can be said to be not very helpful to the process.
The good news is it looks like the RCI has actually gotten down to brass tacks very quickly and the machinery is in the works.
The accusations that the RCI is not impartial are beginning to be shown to be untrue. The withdrawals are immaterial – it just shows that the RCI is humane enough to allow the complainants, TBH’s family and the Selangor state government, to actively participate in the proceedings.
However, their withdrawal just means the opposite - that the family and the Selangor state government will not be able to participate in the process. It’s a loss to them, not the RCI.
A survey among legal academics and practicing lawyers indicates the withdrawal of TBH’s family from the participation in the RCI will not have any effect on the proceedings.
Associate Professor Dr Johan Shamsuddin of the Faculty of Law (University of Malaya) said that while the proceedings would go on as scheduled, the family would have lost a valuable opportunity to observe and pose questions at the hearing.
“The lawyers representing them should have advised them against the withdrawal but it appears they did not act in the best interest of their clients,“ he said.
TBH’s lawyers had also challenged that Tan Sri James Foong Cheng Yuen should not preside as the RCI’s chairman as he is a sitting Federal Court judge. Again, more theatrics. To put things into perspective, Datuk Seri Mohd Shafee Abdullah, legal counsel for MACC explained that in previous British Royal Commissions of Inquiry, Law Lords had sat as panellists and chairmen, thereby setting the precedent.
Latest update Sunday 20th Feb
Although the departure of the Teoh family and the Selangor Government is regrettable, the task to find the truth is mandated by the law and commissioned by the King.
and here for the NST view
THE rejection by Teoh Beng Hock's family of the Royal Commission of Inquiry is unfortunate for it colours any further attempt to find the answer to his death. It would put in question any findings, even if it were to be homicide, since doubts have been cast on the whole process.