Appellate judge makes shocking claims of judicial scam in affidavit


  • Nation
  • Thursday, 14 Feb 2019

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 -- Speaker of Parliament Datuk Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof (centre) while taking a group photo with five new editions of Janab's Law Series during a Presentation Janab Law Series and University Cum Court Annexed Arbitration Scheme Book to the Speaker of Dewan Rakyat at Parliament today. All five books are new editions laws on civil procedure, criminal procedure, evidence, advocacy and professional ethnics and legal remedies and conveying practice. --fotoBERNAMA (2018) COPYRIGHTS RESERVED

PETALING JAYA: An appellate judge has made shocking claims in court papers, exposing purported scam between certain top judges and private litigants to cheat the government.

The revelation by Court of Appeal judge Datuk Dr Hamid Sultan Abu Backer was contained in his 65-page affidavit filed in support of an application by famous lawyer Karpal Singh’s daughter Sangeet Kaur Deo to declare that the chief justice had failed to defend the integrity of the judiciary in two cases.

He said the scam was carried out by nominees of politicians getting into contracts with the government, but once the government pulled out, the private parties would take the government to court to claim compensation.

The private parties created contracts with the government to defraud public funds and the apex court was perceived to be sympathetic to them, said Hamid.

“I will give an example. The government will enter into a contract with a political nominee with no intention of honouring it.

“Subsequently, the government will terminate the contract and the nominee will sue the government for breach of contract.

“The government may record a consent judgment accepting liability and agreeing to assess damages.

“This modus operandi was to deprive the exchequer by false claims,” he wrote in the affidavit.

He said this was illegal and to stump it, he developed the jurisprudence relating to fraud on the exchequer or entering into unfair terms with the government, which will make the contract unenforceable based on public policy grounds.

He claimed that some top judges frowned upon his move and judgments on commercial matters that supported the government.

Hamid also hinted at a top judge, whom he referred to as “ARLC”, who became a sort of a “Maharajalela” (tyrant) dictating what the judges should do and write.

This was also the same judge who reprimanded him as he was upset with Hamid’s jurisprudence that prevented ARLC from helping the nominees, said Hamid.

Hamid also claimed he has direct knowledge of judicial and constitutional misconduct in the judiciary in consequence of at least two events.

The first one being that a month before the 14th General Election last May, a top judge and other judges including himself met for lunch at an Italian restaurant, when the top judge and a number of the other judges were concerned they would be removed if the opposition came to power.

“Basically, it was a confession relating to guilt,” he wrote.

The other event was that after the election, a senior judge informed him that there was interference in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s case decisions at the Court of Appeal as well as at the Federal Court and similarly also in Karpal Singh’s sedition case.

“These two events brought me back to flashbacks of other events which together made a strong case for Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) as well as tribunalisation to expose judicial as well as constitutional misconduct of top judges with the aid and support of other judges,” he said.

He said the contents of his affidavit were prima facie to expose constitutional and judicial misconduct before the election and also after the election, which is continuing without abate.

There was also sufficient material to purportedly say top judges are continuing to mislead the public so as not to expose the judicial crimes, said Hamid.

“The CJ (Chief Justice) himself not seeking RCI when the Bar Council has publicly demanded twice for RCI - this is one of the disappointments and regrets.

“In addition, a former Chief Justice has sarcastically questioned the integrity of the CJ. The CJ has not responded to it,” he wrote.

Hamid, however, acknowledged that there were a number of good judges of integrity as well as competence in the Court of Appeal as well as at the High Court, including judicial commissioners.

He did not say the same about many of the apex judges in the past and present as he claimed that they knew of the wrongdoings and did not lift a finger to stop the judicial massacre in the administration of justice.

“In fact, some of the senior ones were directly or indirectly involved in fixing of coram or had full knowledge of constitutional as well as judicial misconduct and were silent or supported the constitutional crime by top judges for their own selfish interest related to promotion, etc thereby destroying the integrity of the administration of justice,” he said.


Article type: metered
User Type: anonymous web
User Status:
Campaign ID: 7
Cxense type: free
User access status: 3
   

Across The Star Online