KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk V.K. Lingam and Tun Eusoff Chin are seeking to remove two commissioners from the inquiry.
In the latest attempt to remove the panel members, Datuk Hazman Ahmad, counsel for the former Chief Justice, informed the commission of his application when the proceedings started yesterday.
However, Datuk Mahadev Shankar the very person Eusoff wanted removed from the panel immediately stopped the lawyer and reminded him of a ruling made earlier in the day.
Barely half hour into the proceedings, Mahadev informed all parties that the commission had decided that all interlocutory be made in writing and notice be given to all other parties in advance.
He also said all allegations of fact had to be attached with the application by way of direct evidence and not hearsay.
If it is based on hearsay, then its source must be revealed, he said, adding that such applications were not privilege and that the applicants must take responsibility for whatever allegations they included.
The commissioner also gave a reminder to all lawyers involved in the proceedings by quoting from Lord Macmillan's The Ethics of Advocacy.
Upon stopping Hazman from making his application orally, Mahadev said: Put it in writing and support it with all the evidence. Don't make an oral application. We will hear you out.
However, the lawyer insisted that he be given an opportunity to make his application as had been done by other parties.
Even Karpal Singh's application against the chairman was entertained. I should be given an opportunity, too, he said.
Mahadev then reminded the lawyer that the ruling was made yesterday morning, and urged him to respect it.
Hazman replied that he would comply. He submitted his written application in the afternoon.
At the same time, Lingam's application to recuse Professor Emeritus Datuk Dr Khoo Kay Kim from the panel was also made through his counsel R. Thayalan.
However, commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor made a ruling at the end of the day barring the press from publishing contents of the written applications until they were heard and decided upon.
All commissioners now have had at least one recusal application against each of them.
None have been successful so far.