Is Govt Suffering From Truth Deficiency Syndrome

---

Enough has been said and written about former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s addendum and the royal pardon by legal experts and politicians. Even coffee shops and restaurants have become venues for such discussions.
The attempt to muzzle further discussion on the issue must be addressed as Malaysians have already been given the “Full Monty” in areas of the law, the king’s prerogative, and his right to tamper justice with mercy.
Some background: In 2009, the police banned any mention of the murdered Mongolian model, Altantuya Shaariibuu, or the BN takeover of Perak from the by-election, citing the principle of sub judice to justify the order.
“Both cases are still in court. As such, talking about them or bringing them up in crowds can be sub judice or contempt of court," declared then-Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar.
In 2015, lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, representing former Selangor menteri besar Mohd Khir Toyo, complained to the learned judges in the Federal Court: “Two articles - a commentary by R Nadeswaran titled ‘Truth, nothing but the truth’ and an editorial titled ‘Don't do the crime, if you can’t do the time’ were ‘prejudicial’ to my client.”
Former Selangor menteri besar Mohd Khir ToyoThis was a comment piece that I wrote after the Federal Court reserved its decision and subsequently affirmed the one-year jail sentence passed by the lower court.
“This article was calculated to appear before the decision, probably to prejudice and cause irreparable damage to proceedings,” Shafee had told the judges.
Chief Judge of Malaya Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin said the court took note of the articles but denied that they or social media influenced the judges.
The Federal Court panel said they were not affected by any reports on Khir’s case and had only decided purely on the evidence and the facts.
“None of these reports, either here or other reports, influenced us at all,” Zulkefli said before delivering the five-man panel’s unanimous decision.
Najib’s addendum
On Dec 10 last year, when answering questions in Parliament, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim urged all parties to wait until the Court of Appeal decides the issue of royal addendum.
He said commenting on the matter until the court’s decision is made would violate the Dewan Rakyat’s Standing Order 23(1)(g), which prohibits discussing sub judice issues.
“It is not reasonable to comment before the court’s ruling,” he said, stressing the importance of respecting legal processes.
The Court of Appeal has since allowed Najib’s appeal, the judicial review application will be heard.
So, the matter is still technically and legally before the High Court, which would decide the merits of Najib's application.
Would it not be sub judice for Anwar to announce that the addendum was sent directly to the attorney-general?
Especially so after Court of Appeal judge Azhahari Kamal Ramli remarked that he was disturbed that the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had not outrightly challenged the existence of a royal addendum.
The judge pointed out that so far, the arguments by the legal representative for the home minister, the government, and several others have been legal technicalities rather than denying the existence of the royal addendum.
On Monday, Muhammad Farhan Muhammad Shafee, acting for Najib, said the AGC, which represented the Pardons Board and the government, informed the Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz at the case management hearing.
According to senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan, this was because the matter involved sensitive matters.
“They (AGC) would be applying for a protective order and gag order,” Farhan said after case management.
He was made to understand that the AGC sought the protective order and gag order not just for court documents but for the entire judicial review proceedings.
However, Najib’s lead counsel Shafee objected to the move.
“The matter had been discussed in the open, including by Anwar, and is of public interest,” he was quoted as saying by The Vibes.
I agree with Shafee and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said that the issue has already been discussed.
Azalina said: “Number one, the matter is already in the public domain.
“Number two, Parliament is going to sit next month. So all this will be raised again.”
Copies of related purported documents are already being circulated on social media. Najib loyalist Eric See-To raised questions over a purported leak of the Federal Territories Pardons Board meeting minutes.
See-To, through his “Lim Sian See” Facebook page, questioned who had been responsible for leaking the purported minutes of the pardons board on social media, adding that this was an attempt to show that there was no discussion about placing Najib under house arrest.
Gag order
On X, user “KlutzyKucing” posted a purported copy of the addendum.
Why close the stable doors after the horses have bolted?
How will a gag order or whatever order prevent such documents, even if they are fake or doctored, be prevented from the public? How can discussion be curbed?
The house arrest issue is of public interest and affects the whole country, and Malaysians have a right to know the truth and court proceedings.
A gag order and a prohibition on reporting the judicial review process will lead people to believe the government has more secrets to hide.
Is the government suffering from truth deficiency syndrome? First, there was silence, then denials, and finally, Anwar admitted the existence of the addendum. What next?
Does the government want Malaysians to know the truth from the horse’s mouth or rely on half-baked news and half-truths on social media? - Mkini
R NADESWARAN is a veteran journalist who writes on bread-and-butter issues. Comments: [email protected].
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---