1. Among the cleverest people in the world are the analysts – the people who can see through solids, even see and recognise what lies behind. This gives them power and as we all know power corrupts. Few among the analysts can restrain the corrupting influence of their power.
2. The analyst who works for Malaysian Insider clearly is one who cannot resist the abuse of that power. Given a task by his master he comes up with a fantastic analysis on the recent decision by the court that the word “Allah” is exclusive to Islam and may not be used by the Catholic “Herald”. He saw an opportunity to serve his master like the toady he is.
3. His master had recently demonised me by incorrectly and clearly deliberately translating my statement on corruption. I had said that I was sold by my divisional representatives for RM200/-. The English version was correct. But the Malay translation implied that I bribed my divisional delegates with RM200/-. Why I should bribe them so they would not vote for me is beyond me. But the opportunity to blacken my name in the eyes of the Malays was too good to be missed by his master.
4. When asked to correct and apologise, Malaysian Insider decided to demonise me instead by stating that twenty-five years ago when “Tun Mahathir Mohamad dismantled one of the most respected judicial institutions in the Commonwealth and destroyed the concept of separation of powers in Malaysia rhetorically he asked “how many Malaysians were truly upset with his interference?” In one sentence he made a lie appear to be an indisputable truth, without stating what indeed I had done to deserve the demonisation.
5. The arguments by the great analyst are rather convoluted but the implication is clear. The Malaysian courts (and here Tun Suffian’s words are made use of) will never be able to recover the respect they had before I “destroyed” them.
6. The truth is that the courts often made judgements against me or the government I lead. The classic case is when UMNO, the ruling party was declared illegal because a few branches cheated. Yet recently when the Central Committee of the DAP was found to have basically cheated, it was simply asked to hold another election. But for UMNO, when four out of more than 6000 branches did not follow procedures, the whole party was declared illegal. The judge who made this judgement was then promoted. I did not object.
7. When Anwar sued me for defamation because I repeated to the press the judgement made by the Appeal Court which acquitted him I thought a Malaysian court would decide this in one sitting. If I was wrong, then the appeal court which found that Anwar did not commit sodomy on the day mentioned in the charge but averred that he did commit sodomy on other days must also be wrong. The third appeal judge concurred with the guilty verdict of the High Court. But on the basis of a wrong date, Anwar was acquitted and released. I merely repeated the findings of the Appeal Court when asked at a Press Conference.
8. Apparently the court which heard the defamation case against me, upon hearing the arguments of the fearsome Karpal Singh, Anwar’s lawyer, felt that there was a case for me to answer. That was fine. But Anwar’s lawyers kept asking for postponements after postponements so that the case dragged on for more than four years.
9. During those four years I was deprived of the right to say anything against Anwar as the case was considered to be sub judice. I basically lost my right of free speech and Anwar enjoyed a long period of freedom from my criticisms.
10. If the courts of Malaysia are shackled forever by me, surely the decision would have been reached at the first sitting. I cannot believe that repeating the words of a judge when pronouncing judgement is illegal or constitutes defamation. That the court was forced to delay judgement by the frequent postponements is a denial of justice, for lawyers often repeat, “Justice delayed is justice denied”. In my case the court took four years to find me innocent. Justice was denied me.
11. And there are many cases where the courts of Malaysia find against the Government in my time – including unprecedentedly declaring UMNO, the ruling party to be illegal. At other times despite detentions under the ISA was not open to legal challenges, detainees were released on a writ of habeas corpus. Before I was Prime Minister no one ever challenged the right of the Minister concerned to detain anyone under the ISA.
12. It seems to me that far from the courts being constrained by me, the fearsome personality of Karpal Singh plays a more effective role in the courts. In fact when some UMNO supporters were charged, their preference was to engage Karpal because his fearsome and overbearing personality was considered enough to convince the court.
13. The Malaysian courts are as free as can be even though certain lawyers seem to get away with unruly behaviour in Malaysian courts. The decision of the courts on the use of the word “Allah” is an example of their independence. Whereas the High Court decided that the word can be used by the “Herald” the Appeal Court disagreed. If the courts are in thrall to the former Prime Minister, surely the lower court would decide supposedly according to my wishes and not the higher, three men Appeal Court. But the opposite is the case.
14. It is ridiculous to suggest that the courts of Malaysia had ever been under the control of the Prime Minister. I am reminded of the Israelis who insist that they are under threat of Arab aggression when in fact they are the aggressors who have seized Palestinian land to build their settlements and who arrested 10,000 Palestinians including children, torture and kill them with impunity. Malaysian Insider will trot out the same old argument against me, as the Israelis do, because it is really bankrupt of ideas to demonise me. You can bet that Malaysian Insider will come up with the same baseless accusation every now and again. It was the Nazi Propaganda Minister, Goebbels, who declared that, lies repeated often enough will be accepted as the truth.