DIAM VINCI CODE - The Metramac Politikus

Malaysia Incorporated and Malaysia Ministerial Unincorporated unfold fantasies of varying interest ... let's look...

This is what Appeal Court President Gopal Sri Ram had to say:

Sri Ram said: "You may well ask how all this could have happened without the direct involvement of Tun Daim. It is also incomprehensible why the defendant, as it was constituted immediately before the takeover by Metro Juara, was not given this same financial support by the Federal Government. ...It is not at all clear why the Minister of Finance used his power to favour Anuar Othman and Datuk Halim Saad."

Halim jump and responded ...

“I have kept silent thus far as the matter is pending appeal. But the nature of the judgment and the comments from the media have made it necessary for me to react by making this statement. ...the judgment had damaged him “probably in an irreparable way. I am deprived of this basic natural justice and human rights which had been recognised since biblical times. I have large business interests locally and overseas. ...The money (RM32.5 million) was ours personally as we extended this sum earlier from our own pockets. By no stretch of the imagination was this money belonging to Metramac. ... on Feb 13, 1992, Daim was no longer the Finance Minister as he had resigned from the post on March 14, 1991. Tun Daim was not involved in the decision of the Works Ministry to reimburse this amount to us. When the revised concession agreement was signed on Feb 13 1992, the Minister of Finance was Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and the Works Minister was Datuk Seri Leo Moggie.”

So, Anwar Ibrahim is now dragged into this DIAM VINCI Politikus conundrum. What has Anwar got to say?

Anwar said: "...the move (by Halim) is "utterly mischievous". ... the Court of Appeal had categorically named Tun Daim Zainuddin as the minister who played a pivotal role in the episode, and also made direct references to Halim and his business partner Anuar Othman. ...One has to be mindful that this is a judicial finding and not a mere allegation. Judicial findings are normally grounded on the reception of sworn evidence given under oath by witnesses and on documents. It is trite that tested and sworn evidence is the entire basis on which three judges of the Court of Appeal substantiated their findings, without fear or favour. ...The Court of Appeal had dealt with facts indicating that Daim approved the deal in 1991, before Anwar became Finance Minister. Suffice to say that findings based on sworn evidence are far superior to those of an unsworn Press statement. Also, the Court of Appeal stated clearly in its judgment that the problems faced by Fawziah Holdings and the loss of the concession to Halim and related parties started in late 1990, when Daim was still the Finance Minister. ...The Attorney-General should start immediate investigations into all parties involved in the Metramac case. In view of the gravity of the matter and in public interest, and also in light of the serious challenge to the integrity of the judiciary, I call on the Government to act immediately by instituting an independent public inquiry into this matter."

Oh ... now A-G has his hair pulled into the fray. What has Ghani Patail got to say?

"Let proper investigations be completed (on allegations of misappropriation of the RM32.5 million by Halim and Anuar Othman). ...A thorough investigation had to be done before anyone is accused of such a crime, and the relevant authorities would be looking into the allegations against Tan Sri Halim Saad and Datuk Anuar Othman. I am not in a position to order such investigations, but if they confirmed the allegations, I would be able to act. All the investigations will be done by the investigative agencies. I have no power, unless you want me to be judge, jury and executioner... but in our system we do not do that. There must be a clear separation of powers to avoid people like me abusing power. So let the proper authorities investigate. Once they have investigated, we will look into the matter. If there is a case, we will charge, and if there is no case, there is no reason to charge innocent people. ...The police, the Anti-Corruption Agency and other relevant authorities were the agencies in charge of investigations. This could be a case of criminal breach of trust or corruption. Let (the authorities) study the matter. We want justice to be done, and it must be done properly and with transparency.

Asked to comment on Halim’s claim that he had not been given an opportunity to be heard before being condemned by the Court of Appeal, Gani said:

"Who am I to say this or that? I will not comment. I do not know who is speaking the truth or not. I do not want to jump to conclusions."

Joining the fray is our great seasoned criminal lawyer Karpal Singh. He urged Daim and Halim to apply to intervene in the proceedings and put up their defence in court. "Taking a confrontational stance against Sri Ram demeans judicial independence," he said, adding that putting up a defence in public also eluded the judicial process.

Bar Council President Yeo Yang Poh also make a point to participate in the hot topic. "Businessman Tan Sri Halim Saad is entitled to give his side of the story. It was the judge’s right to make that observation in his judgment. There is nothing wrong in a civil case for a judge to write judgments of this nature."

Yeo, when asked whether Halim was in contempt of court by issuing his lengthy statement, said he could not say that it was without reading the full statement. "The police should investigate to see whether there are criminal elements, after which criminal proceedings can take place and the accused will be given full opportunity to be heard," he said.

Lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar also want to participate as this is a good chance to get famous.

Malik said: "I am not speaking on the specifics of the issue. In general there were two principles that had to be reconciled. First, the freedom of expression has to be recognised where if a party does not agree with the Court of Appeal’s judgment, it can air its views. But it has to have a balancing factor where when stating its position, that person must be careful in ensuring that what he says is not attacking the administration of justice. It was not proper for any party to engage in public debate in relation to matters which are subject matters in court proceedings, which also applied to newspapers. Newspapers obviously have a social duty to report legal proceedings but they must also ensure that the news report does not compromise the integrity of the court."

So, we get more views from the main actors and the side-kicks. Where are we now? What had been made clear? Are we seeing something very Mahathirisma? Is this a great hollywood script? Hollywood producers may be interested to film chapter 2 of the New Malaysianised version of "The President's Men". It would be a far greater storyline and a far greater conspiracy theory that will unfold.

I can't make personal comments on this issue as I am not a lawyer and I don't need to promote my business. It will be insidious. Wish all of the great actors great health and a fantastic journey to the new Malaysian DAIM VINCI CODE ...