jump to navigation

Sivarasa’s Press Statement at the ACA October 11, 2007

Posted by elizabethwong in Current Affairs, Democracy, Human Rights, Malaysia, Note2Self, Politics.
Tags: , , , , , ,


This morning Mr Sim Tze Tzin ( Personal Assistant to Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim ) and I delivered our written responses to the notices issued by the ACA on 4th October 2007 under section 22 of the Anti Corruption Act 1997 ordering us, amongst others, to provide details of the identity of the persons who brought the video clip to us.

We have declined to provide any information on the identity of the source or information that might lead to disclosure of their identity ( such as the name of the restaurant where we met them ) on the basis that it might compromise their personal safety. We have also said that it is not in our power to give such information as we had given them our undertaking not to reveal it to any one without their prior permission. We do not, at this point of time, have their permission to do so. We have also said that we will be able to supply that information once they authorise its disclosure.

We also informed the ACA that it is our view that issuance of the above-said notice under section 22 of the Act is an unreasonable exercise of power and is wrong in law for the following reasons:

a. that up to date the investigating officer/s have failed to conduct a proper and competent technical investigation into the authenticity of the video clip;

b. that this notice was issued to us even before any statement was recorded from Dato VK Lingam and/or Tun Ahmad Fairuz: hence there was no basis whatsoever for any assumption on the part of the investigating officer/s that the video may not be an authentic recording.

c. The protection accorded under section 53 of the Act to persons giving information to officers of the ACA may not apply in the circumstances of this investigation. That protection only applies in an investigation into a report made by an officer of the ACA after receiving such information from such persons.
We also pointed out to them that recent revelations of the alleged behaviour of ACA officers involved in the investigation of corruption allegations against Dato Ramli Yusuff, the Head of CID in Bukit Aman ( see http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/corridors.php?itemid=8821 entitled “A den of thieves” for full details) show that in the course of that investigation, ACA had issued an order to produce under section 22 of the Act to Datuk Ramli to produce a file containing names of police informants. Serious allegations are being made in writing by lawyers for Dato Ramli Yusuff that ACA officers had then contacted these police informants and subjected them to pressure and oblique threats to make them change their previous statements given to the Commercial Crime Investigation Department. Those lawyers take the position that such abuses of power warrant a public Commission of Inquiry. In the light of these allegations, we remain even more concerned for the safety of those who had informed us about the video in the event their names are given to the Agency.

We must not forget that there are many persons who are in power and who are connected to those in power who have an interest in the source not coming forward. Even if the identity of the source is revealed in confidence to the authorities, we are not confident that the safety of the source will not be subsequently compromised.

We reiterate our position as stated earlier – any issue that arises as to authenticity of the video clip is solved very simply, and it is no rocket science to figure this out. Give an appropriate copy of the video clip to a relevant expert in this field and s/he will in a matter of a few hours be able to confirm whether the video clip is an authentic recording or not. Such an expert will be able to do the job that this so-called independent panel has been appointed to do much more quickly, reliably and cheaply.

We can then get on with the far more important job of a Royal Commission into the practice of corruption and “fixing” of top judicial positions in the judiciary. We reiterate that the persons who brought the video clip to us will be able to speak publicly before a Royal Commission which will also give them full legal immunity under the law.

Sivarasa Rasiah
Vice President
Parti Keadilan Rakyat



1. monsterball - October 11, 2007

Sivarasa is doing the right thing not to reveal the person.
Our government have for years ..very bad reputations to be trusted.
Siva is wise and brave.

2. shawn - October 11, 2007

I don’t think that it is possible to technically prove that a tape is authentic. However, it is certainly possible to show that a tape is not authentic. If we do not have the necessary expertise in this country, we could always ask the FBI for help again. They’ve been nice enough to help us with the Nurin CCTV images. I’m guessing that they’ll have the necessary equipment and expertise to check if the tape is a fake.

3. penangkia - October 11, 2007

Why ACA so keen on getting the whistle blower to proved the tape authenticity ? And why not question Lingam wheather he is the person in the video clip ?
Did Lingam deny it was him ?If so,
Why not send the tape to the FBI as what they did to find Nurin’s murderer?
IMO,this is another cover up in the making.
Oops…i should say another plastic surgery.

4. wits0 - October 11, 2007

Problem seems to be that the 3 stooges commission and those behind it seem to WANT to deny its authenticity. Hence the beating around the bush. Even the Bozo No. 1 already stated that severe action will be taken if the tape is fake BUT similarly made no mention if the tape is genuine. The hints are always between the lines in Bolehland…..they can’t hide everything like with an aphorism about a habitual liar finding it hard to be consistent.

5. monsterball - October 12, 2007

shawn..you are right…but they will NEVER want to prove it to be authentic…since if proven so…it will mean someone in UMNO is fooling around with true justices of the country. This will expose what UMNO is…so they will go all out to make it difficult…while simultaneously trying to bullshit the people with their so call 3 men mission to find out the truths. One have spoken how powerless they are….yet the response from Nazri is as usual….idiotic and fill of shit.
He will be the one trying to talk cock …with Najib supporting the cock and bull of Nari’s…..in his usual cunning and idiotic ways too.
Worst of all….Pak Lah is no “People’s PM” as he promised.
He is selfish and every move he makes…is to make sure he gets UMNO kingpins to support him. He is no people’s PM. He bullshits all the voters.

6. wits0 - October 12, 2007

Perhaps they already know that the tape IS authentic ; the only chess move left is to discredit it via the human side of it by completely turning the witnesses over by hook or by crook.

7. oA - October 12, 2007


Look at all those crooks now ever feeling so insecure – apprehensive of their own kind. The video had kept them on the edge – not sure whom to trust.

Let them go around be suspicious of each other and hopefully double cross themselves and trigger more such public exposures.

To the two PKRs, do not expose the identity of the whistle blowers. Put them to good use since they are within the circle of the crooked. Let them dig more dirt on those crooks for the benefit of the public and country.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: