Game’s Up, Gani, Time To Go!

hi! a bit late to put his up as i just came back from where i was away for 4 days without internet access. this was sent to me on 16 oct which actually only one day late anyway. was away from 14 oct and back only this afternoon. anyway, enjoy my friend martin’s article. if you are observant you will notice that martin love to use heading that begins with the same letter e.g. the last one about RPK, ‘peerless patriot and prince‘. (which i had also sent to malaysia today site, which think appeared in malaysiakini too)

Game’s Up, Gani, Time To Go!

By Martin Jalleh

Lady Justice haunts and hounds Bolehland’s Attorney-General (AG) Abdul Gani Patail over his hidden hand in Anwar Ibrahim’s trials 10 years ago. The skeletons in his cupboard hang out. He can no longer hide behind the skirt of the Executive. The naked truth has caught up with him.

The latest expose on the AG having abused his power to fabricate evidence in Anwar’s trials was made by Lim Kit Siang in Parliament yesterday (Malaysiakini, 15.10.08). The veteran politician likened Gani to a “criminal” and demanded that he “resign immediately”.

Quoting unnamed sources, Kit Siang said that he understands that solicitor-general Idrus Harun had carried out an investigation into the claims (in a police report filed by Anwar) in July and “has concluded that the AG had indeed abused his power to fabricate evidence” against Anwar.

Several days before Kit Siang’s revelation, the public got to hear the startling claims by Mat Zain Ibrahim, a retired senior police officer who probed the infamous “black eye” incident involving Anwar in 1998, on Gani having allegedly tampered with evidence in the case (Malaysiakini, 10.10.08).

In a set of court documents Mat Zain Ibrahim implied that the actions of Gani, then a senior deputy public prosecutor, had delayed the investigation process and concealed facts from the then AG, the late Mohtar Abdullah.

Mat Zain’s claims were first made public during Anwar’s current sodomy trial in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court . Anwar’s lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah had read out the document in court during submissions on why Gani should not be involved in any aspect of the sodomy case.

(So serious were Mat Zain’s allegations that Sessions judge SM Komathy Suppiah ruled that the details, which were read out in court, were admissible in the ongoing proceedings of Anwar’s sodomy trial. She also lifted an initial gag order that prevented the media from publishing the details.)

Clear & Consistent Allegations

The above allegations are very “consistent” with the serious allegations of prosecutorial impropriety and the obstruction of justice, made against Gani Patail in the past, particularly during Anwar’s corruption case and the related Zainur Zakaria contempt case.

Zainur was sentenced to three months’ jail by High Court judge Augustine Paul on 30 Nov. 1998 for contempt of court when he made an application on Anwar’s behalf to stop Gani and Azahar Mohamad (then senior prosecutors) from further prosecuting in Anwar’s corruption case.

Anwar’s application was based on a statutory declaration made by lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon and a letter he wrote to the then AG accusing Gani and Azahar of threatening his client, S. Nallakaruppan, and asking the latter to fabricate evidence against Anwar.

Manjit did not mince his words: "I was shocked that Dato Gani even had the gall to make such a suggestion to me.  He obviously does not know me.  I do not approve of such extraction of evidence against ANYONE, not even, or should I say least of all, a beggar picked up off the streets.

“A man’s life, or for that matter even his freedom, is not a tool for prosecution agencies to use as a bargaining chip.  No jurisprudential system will condone such an act (my emphasis).

"It is blackmail and extortion of the highest culpability (my emphasis) and my greatest disappointment is that a once independent agency that I worked with some 25 years ago and of which I have such satisfying memories has descended to such levels in the creation and collection of evidence.

“To use the death threat as a means to the extortion of evidence that is otherwise not there (why else make such a demand?)  It is unforgivable and surely must in itself be a crime, leave alone a sin, of the greatest magnitude (my emphasis).  Whether his means justify the end that he seeks are matters that Dato Gani will have to wrestle with within his own conscience."

The Federal Court that heard the Zainur Zakaria (contempt) case freed Zainur from the contempt of court conviction. Presiding Justice Steve Shim said Gani should have given his personal explanation on the allegation that he had threatened Nallakaruppan to fabricate evidence against Anwar.

(The Federal Court was appalled by Augustine Paul’s conduct. They said it   "gave the picture that he was behaving as though he was acting as counsel for the two prosecutors in  the motion". A pall had then hung over the judiciary and country.)

There was also the serious allegation by Anwar in his police report in July 1999 that the late Mohtar Abdullah and Gani had "subverted the cause of justice and violated the law" by not prosecuting then Minister for International Trade and Industry (MITI) Rafidah Aziz for corruption.

Anwar had attached a document signed by Gani (which was handed to Anwar when he was the DPM by the then AG) stipulating that a prima facie case had been made against Rafidah Aziz on five counts of corruption under Section  2(2),Ordinance 22, 1970.

Gani’s gall & guts

In spite of the alleged “blackmailing and extortion of the highest culpability” and the alleged interference of justice in shielding Rafidah Aziz, Gani was rewarded for allowing himself to be used and his position to be abused.

Commenting on Gani’s promotion to AG in 2001, Steven Gan of Malaysiakini would write: “Abdul Gani Patail is today tapped as Malaysia ’s top legal officer. The legal fraternity, and the rest of the country, cannot but be flabbergasted by this astounding appointment.

“This is, after all, the man – who as chief prosecutor in former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim’s trials – was unable to get the dates of the alleged sodomy acts right, not once but twice. This is the man who was responsible for parading the infamous semen-stained mattress during the court hearings.

“More importantly, this is the man who the Federal Court said should provide ‘some answers to the allegations on the fabrication of evidence’ when it threw out the Zainur Zakaria’s contempt of court case.”

Karpal Singh had this to say then: "In the public’s interest, it is vital that the A-G, who is the highest legal officer in the country, be like ‘Caesar’s wife’, above suspicion" (Star, 19.12.91). Alas, no office has been viewed with more suspicion by the public than the AG’s Chambers!

De facto law minister Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz has denied Kit Siang’s claims, stating that an investigation on the matter was still underway. He added that it was the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) and not the solicitor general who was probing the matter (Malaysiakini, 15.10.08).

What the defective de facto law minister says no longer matters to most Malaysians. Public perception of the office of the AG continues to deteriorate from suspicion and skepticism to scorn.  With each added glaring revelation and allegation, Gani gains more contempt from the court of public opinion.

The recent claim by ex-deputy president of Sabah Progressive Party (Sapp) Raymond Tan that he had been instrumental in stopping the PM from ordering the ACA’s arrest of party president Yong Teck Lee, makes Nazri’s implicit insistence that the ACA will be independent, very laughable and ludicrous!

Abdul Gani Patail can no longer be trusted to honour his oath of office. He should go. But in Bolehland only the courageous (like Zaid Ibrahim) who hold on to their principles are willing to let go of high position.

Will Gani have the guts to give up and to salvage whatever honour he has left? Highly improbable! Perhaps the PM, who, with the invaluable help of Umno recently, will be riding off into the sunset quite soon, could assist the Attorney General on to his high horse?


Martin Jalleh

(16 Oct. 2008)

Leave a Reply