Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim demanded to know why Vincent Tan's son was "let off hook"; PM Anwar Ibrahim has the power to order an investigation into that and Tan's control of Sports Toto

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

The headline and story published in FreeMalaysiaToda on 22 March 2022:

Why was tycoon’s son ‘let off hook’, says Anwar

For the second consecutive day, Anwar Ibrahim questioned the release of a tycoon’s son following the latter’s arrest for a major drug-related offence.

Speaking at a PKR ceramah tonight, the party president said the tycoon’s son had been arrested by police for not just using drugs but also growing and distributing it.

To Be Read With 

Saturday, February 19, 2022

Tan Sri Vincent Tan son' drug charges cannot be divorced from 2006 Royal Commission which found Tan Sri Vincent had interfered with the judiciary, and from the Vincent -VK Lingam defamation cases of the 90s - Drug charges, and all any related breaches of the law must be thoroughly investigated immediately, findings made public

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

FMT has reported:

Former Attorney-General Tommy Thomas has slammed allegations that he acted in a corrupt manner in handling the case of tycoon Vincent Tan’s son who was arrested for drug offences, when he was in office.

In a statement, Thomas said as is usual in criminal matters, lawyers of the accused submitted written representations to the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) to reconsider the decision to charge.

This comes after Twitter account Edisi Siasat, which recently changed its name to Edisi Khas, claimed that although Tan’s son was arrested under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act for being involved in a very large quantity of drugs, the case was classified as an NFA (no further action) by Thomas.

This report should be read in context of the 2006 Royal Commission of inquiry into the  VK Lingam tapes which found that Tan Sri Vincent Tan and others had interfered with the judiciary  

Malaysian law does not tolerate drug traffickers. The law must be applied equally to all.

TO BE READ WITH

NEWS

When AG was in the dock for contempt in 1998

Published:  Apr 24, 2019 7:28 PM

⋅

Updated: 9:14 PM

Much to the chagrin of the legal fraternity, the Federal Court yesterday imposed a 30-day prison sentence and RM40,000 fine on lawyer Arun Kasi for contempt of court. It also dismissed his application for a stay of execution of the ruling.

In delivering the sentence, Justice Ramly Ali, who led a five-member panel, cited Arun's refusal to tender an unreserved apology for his remarks.

Attorney-General Tommy Thomas had initiated the contempt proceedings on the grounds that Arun's online articles scandalised judges of the Federal Court.

Ironically, Thomas was in Arun's shoes more than two decades ago.

ADS

In 1998, then High Court judge RK Nathan had convicted Thomas for contempt and sentenced the latter to six months in jail.

This was over Thomas' comment regarding the settlement of the defamation suits filed against him and law firm Skrine & Co by business tycoon Vincent Tan, his companies and his lawyer VK Lingam.

The defamation suits were over an article in London-based trade magazine International Commercial Litigation, in which Thomas is alleged to have said that certain plaintiffs and their lawyers enjoyed improper preferential treatment in the courts.

The article also questioned the independence of the judiciary, especially in cases involving influential businesses.

In his judgment, Nathan (photo) found Thomas' statement to have insulted the court and a repudiation of a settlement agreement in a libel case.

In the statement which the judge found offensive, Thomas had said he had not been consulted adequately by his insurers about the decision to settle and that the settlement was insisted upon by the insurer despite his objections.

Despite Thomas retracting the statement, expressing regret and apologising to the court, Nathan slapped him with the six-month sentence.

In 2001, The Court of Appeal substituted the jail sentence with an RM10,000 fine, with one of the three judges giving a dissenting opinion. 

The court also granted Thomas a stay of execution pending his appeal to the Federal Court.

The dissenting judge was Gopal Sri Ram, who held that the appeal must be allowed, as the conviction against Thomas "destroys the freedom of thought and speech."

Fast forward to 2019, the Attorney-General's Chambers has appointed Sri Ram (photo) as the lead prosecutor for the 1MDB-related charges against former premier Najib Abdul Razak.

Among those who criticised the sentence meted out to Arun was Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) executive director Latheefa Koya, who asked if he was a soft target.

She pointed out that the same issue which landed Arun in trouble was raised by Court of Appeal judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer in his explosive affidavit alleging judicial misconduct, which led Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to announce the formation royal commission of inquiry into the matter. 

Arun's offending statements were in relation to the Federal Court expunging a dissenting judgment by Hamid in the case of Leap Modulation Sdn Bhd vs PCP Construction Sdn Bhd.

The lawyer had previously asserted that his comments constituted fair criticism.