When you got your degree from the back of a cornflakes box
In 2006-2007, Ramli was about to expose Musa’s relationship with the crime syndicate in the Goh Cheng Poh @ Tengku Goh case. Also, Ramli was about to expose the shenanigans in the plundering of MAS, which was later proven true. Malaysia Today had, in fact, revealed that Nazri Aziz had directed MAS to sack their lawyers and settle its claims with Tajudin Ramli ‘out of court’. Malaysia Today also revealed that Gani Patail had gone on a Hajj with Tajudin’s proxy, Shahidan Shafie.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Allow me to repeat what I have said so many times before. Yes, I just love saying ‘I told you so’. But then we all have our fetishes, so what can I say? To you your fetish and to me mine, I always say. Anyway, back to ‘I want to repeat what I have said so many times before’.
What I said before was: you need to have a brain to become a lawyer, but you do not need to be a lawyer to have a brain. I am not a lawyer but I certainly have a brain and I know how to rationalise. So allow me, a non-lawyer who has a brain, to walk you through the story of why, today, the government withdrew its case against lawyer Rosli Dahlan.
Just to digress a bit, sometimes I wonder where the Attorney General, Gani Patail, obtained his law degree from. I am beginning to suspect that he pinched it from the back of a cornflakes box. Some of the issues involving the law are so fundamental that you do not need to be a lawyer to understand how the law works.
Let me give you an example. Say someone is charged for the crime of robbing a bank and you are charged for the crime of being the driver of the get-away car. Hence you are facing trial as an accomplice to a bank robbery.
Then the court finds the bank robber not guilty. In fact, the court rules that the robbery did not even happen in the first place. However, although the robbery did not happen and the so-called bank robber of the non-existent bank robbery is acquitted, you still face trial on charges of being an accomplice to a bank robbery that never happened.
You then win the case and the court finds you not guilty. Earlier, the bank robber was acquitted and the court ruled that the bank robbery never happened. However, the Attorney General refuses to admit defeat and continues to appeal against your acquittal.
Can you now see why the whole thing puzzles me and causes me to suspect that the Attorney General obtained his law degree from the back of a cornflakes box? How can they continue to pursue a case against you when the court already said that the robbery never happened? You just cannot be guilty of abetting a crime when there was no crime.
For those who may have forgotten or were not following this case from the beginning, five years ago, during the month of Ramadan in 2007, a few MACC officers went to Rosli Dahlan’s office to arrest him and in the process brutalised him. They alleged that he had failed to declare his assets in the manner they required but they manhandled him like he was a terrorist.
Now, note that the MACC did not arrest Rosli for failing to declare his assets. He had, in fact, declared his assets when asked to do so and even the court said so. They arrested Rosli for failing to declare his assets in the manner that they required. Hence, declaring your assets is not enough. You must also declare it in the manner that can satisfy them.
In other words, they ask you to do something and when you do as they ask they move the goalposts and allege that you did not do it in the manner they required. Hence they can still get you even if you comply with their demands.
Very convenient, don’t you think so? This means, if they want to get you, they can get you anyhow by just changing the rules and then allege that you did not follow the rules.
Actually, the truth is they wanted to get Rosli in any way they could — by fair of foul means. Hence they sent him a letter asking him to declare his assets and when he did they then went to his office to arrest him on the allegation that he did not do what they wanted him to do in the manner it should have been done.
I suppose if you had replied to MACC’s letter on a blue piece of paper they can still arrest you because the ‘proper manner’ would have been to reply on a white piece of paper. That is, of course, if they want to get you by hook or by crook.
The Attorney General, Gani Patail, was determined to get Rosli because the former was upset that the latter had thwarted their attempts to fix up the then director of the CCID, Ramli Yusuff, on several trumped up charges.
You see, Rosli was Ramli’s lawyer and he successfully defended the latter and got him acquitted. The Attorney General then appealed against Ramli’s acquittals but several High Courts and the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals. Hence the Attorney General lost and in two of the trials the judges even accused Kevin Morais and Gani Patail of lying.
The MACC, however, continued to pursue their case against Rosli and when he was acquitted they pursued an appeal against him. But Rosli’s case is linked to Ramli’s case and if the latter is not guilty how can there be a case against the former? That is what I meant when I said you could not possibly be guilty of the crime of being the driver of a get-away car in a bank robbery that never happened.
The real issue is: Rosli defended Ramli, who was in line to become the IGP of PDRM. However, Ramli had gone against the powerful unholy trinity of Musa Hasan, Nordin Hassan and Gani Patail. So they wanted to block him from becoming the IGP.
In 2006-2007, Ramli was about to expose Musa’s relationship with the crime syndicate in the Goh Cheng Poh @ Tengku Goh case. Also, Ramli was about to expose the shenanigans in the plundering of MAS, which was later proven true. Malaysia Today had, in fact, revealed that Nazri Aziz had directed MAS to sack their lawyers and settle its claims with Tajudin Ramli ‘out of court’. Malaysia Today also revealed that Gani Patail had gone on a Hajj with Tajudin’s proxy, Shahidan Shafie.
The Musa Hasan, Nordin Hassan and Gani Patail relationship goes way back to the time when the three had forged a close alliance when they fixed up Anwar Ibrahim in the Sodomy I trial. From an incompetent, mattress-carrying investigating officer, Musa Hassan rose to become the IGP. Nordin Hassan rose to become the Director of Prosecutions of the ACA (MACC’s former name) while Gani Patail became the all-powerful Attorney General.
That was Rosli’s biggest mistake. He defended Ramli against this very powerful unholy trinity and thereafter experienced the most painful lesson of his life.
This morning, 2nd August 2012, the MACC’s appeal against Rosli came up before High Court Judge Dato Azman Husin. To everyone’s surprise, the MACC DPP withdrew the appeal. But there is a story behind the MACC’s withdrawal of the appeal. And the story is set out clearly in the two affidavits filed by Dato Ramli and Rosli Dahlan, which you can read in the links below.
Apparently, the MACC appealed against Rosli’s acquittal in order to force him to withdraw his RM50 million civil suits against the various rogue MACC officers, which Rosli filed in 2008. That is why the MACC waited until the last minute to withdraw its appeal against Rosli in the hope he would cave in to their demands. Gani Patail also wanted to put Rosli on tenterhooks and inflict the maximum pain on him since the appeal was doomed to fail.
In Ramli’s and Rosli’s Affidavits, they reveal how they were fixed up and the malicious prosecution and prosecutorial misconduct by Gani Patail, Nordin Hassan and Kevin Morais (see paragraphs 6-10 of Rosli’s affidavit). Paragraphs 10-12 of Ramli’s Affidavit also makes interesting reading.
Note that the MACC DPP’s letter to the court is dated 26th June 2012. However, it was never served on Rosli until yesterday. The glaring discrepancy in that letter is that although it is dated 26th June 2012, the Notice of Withdrawal was purportedly filed almost a month later on 20th July 2012.
In other words, the letter talks about an incident that did not happen until about a month later. Hence, in short, the letter was backdated and is a fabrication. And this is proven by the date/time of the fax transmission signal of all the documents, which bears yesterday’s date and time — 1/8/2012 @ 1627- 1628hr.
If you want to cheat at least be clever about it. You go and backdate a letter regarding an incident that happens one month later and then you make the mistake of faxing it where the date shows that everything was done only yesterday.
Do you really need to go to law school to spot all these mistakes and come to a conclusion that mass fabrication is involved here? Aiyoh, maybe the AG should stick to what he knows best — bonking his staff. He is so poor at fabricating documents.
Actually, the real reason they want to drop this case is because they do not want the two Affidavits below to become public knowledge. If they continue with the case then these Affidavits would be discussed in court. By dropping the case they hope that the Affidavits can be buried and would go unnoticed.
Amongst others would be the revelation of how Razak Musa tried to make a deal with Rosli. They told Rosli they would drop their case against him if he would withdraw his civil suit against them. They realise that the manner in how they manhandled Rosli when they arrested him in 2007 would open themselves to damages. Hence they wanted to make a deal — you withdraw and we will also withdraw.
And that is why they waited until yesterday to withdraw their appeal but backdated the letter so that it would not look too obvious. But they made the mistake of faxing all these backdated documents and then the real dates show up in the fax transmission. Bodohnya Melayu ni semua!
ADDENDUM
http://www.malaysia-today.net/files/Aff-Dato-Ramli-Yusuf-1-8-12.pdf
http://www.malaysia-today.net/files/RD-aff-1-8-12.pdf
http://www.malaysia-today.net/files/TARIKBALIK-RAYUAN-TPR.pdf
