Say No To Hudud

Monday, November 28, 2011

Kl high court is being scandalised: How PwC Malaysia is undermining the Malaysian judiciary

Datuk Dr Rebecca Fatima Sta. Maria, the Secretary General of MITI, was taken aback recently when a CEO from a Multi National Corporation in India asked her about this blog. She replied that she was not aware of this blog but will check and revert to him. This blog is not only being read in Malaysia but also around the world

Rabindra Nathan said that he misconstrued his clients instructions to the point that his clients could not file an afffidavit. The right thing for Johan Raslan and PwC Malaysia to have done is immediately
withdraw Rabindra Nathan as Counsel, instead here is where the scandal is: Rabindra Nathan continues to appear before the same judge on the same case and behaves as though nothing has happened. 

Johan Raslan knows  this is manifestly wrong but chooses to play along.

Judicial Commissioner  Vazeer Alam has so far made two startling decisions in this case which has baffled the legal fraternity;
i) disallowed the discovery application by the plaintiff for both parties to file an affidavit
verifying list of documents. this application is an absolute given before the start of any trial
ii) disallowed the leave application for contempt in spite of overwhelming evidence

As a result of the discovery application being dismissed, PwC Malaysia then attempted to introduce fabricated documents and the leave application for contempt was because of that.

Chief Justice Tan Sri Ariffin Zakaria.
Learned Chief Justice, shouldn't discovery application for documents be automatically granted to ensure a fair trial?

The Judges who have been involved in  this case since 2001, include the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak, YAA Tan Sri Datuk Amar Steve Shim, the current Chief Justice Tan Sri Arrifin Zakaria and
Justices of the Court of Appeal Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail and Justice Hishamuddin Yunus.

In fact in 2005, Justice Hishamuddin Yunus fixed trial dates for this case. Against all odds, PwC Malaysia's counsel obtained a stay of proceedings from the Court of Appeal, pending their appeal to strike out the suit. Hence Justice Hishamuddin Yunus was unable to proceed and hear the case.

PwC Malaysia  successfully managed to stall proceedings for a further 5 years.

In 2010, when the court of appeal hearing was reconvened PwC Malaysia's counsel in open court, 
on Johan Raslan's instructions, withdrew the appeal and were ordered to pay costs to the plaintiffs.

This is the same Johan Raslan who is going to step down soon as Chairman of PwC Malaysia and is the
favourite to take over as Securities Commission Chairman in April 2012.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Shearn Delamore's Rabindra Nathan lies in open court and gets away with it: PwC Malaysia Senior Partners heave a sigh of relief

On 11th August 2011, before Judicial Commissioner Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, PwC Malaysia's lead counsel Rabindra Nathan sought to introduce an additional bundle of documents.

Cambridge educated Rabindra Nathan
Judicial Commissioner Vazeer Alam did not grant leave for the contempt application.

The clearest sign of contempt is Shearn Delamore's Rabindra Nathan standing at the bar and giving evidence from each document, in full detail, and giving a counsel's undertaking to file an affidavit, with or without a formal application, and saying that :

his instructions were that these documents were discovered
in a safe after six (6) years on the 9th of August 2011.

Rabindra said that
i) the existence of these documents were simply forgotten
ii) these documents were extremely relevant and material to the case
iii) with or without a formal application, his clients will file an affidavit
to introduce these documents.

Rabindra Nathan never fulfilled the undertaking, and has the audacity to say that he misconstrued his client's instructions to the extent that an affidavit cannot be filed, even though his client's were all there in court when he went in detail about the documents and gave his counsel's undertaking to file the affidavit.

Johan Raslan and Chin Kwai Fatt have gotten away with it also.
Dear Malaysians, had Shearn Delamore's Rabindra Nathan come to court in Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia or the United Kingdom, and without batting an eyelid said that he had misconstrued his clients instructions to the point he cannot file an affidavit, would he have gotten away with it? 

Legal pundits, not only in Malaysia but in other Commonwealth countries, when asked about the matter, all said that it is a clear cut case of contempt of court.

In his heart Rabindra feels guilty because he knows he did something very wrong, and got away with it.

This is Malaysia in 2011, where a top lawyer can lie in open court and get away with it. Hopefully Dato Seri Najib will take all this into consideration as he draws up the reform agenda for the country.

Dato Seri Najib, we hope you will take all this into consideration  while reforming the country