Gani was right that the public holiday yesterday for the whole nation to mourn the passing of the 11th Yang di Pertuan Agong was not appropriate to pursue the controversy over the propriety, wisdom and constitutionality of his appointment as the new Attorney-General from January 1 next year.
However, the overwhelming constitutional and national importance of this issue would not permit Gani to procrastinate a single moment in giving a satisfactory accounting on various burning issues stemming from his appointment, in particular the need for him to clear himself of two serious allegations of obstruction of justice - threatening Anwar Ibrahim’s former tennis partner Datuk S. Nallakaruppan to fabricate evidence against Anwar and shielding the Minister for International Trade and Industry Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz from prosecution on five charges of corruption - as well as his commitment to bring about a new era of public confidence in the system and cause of justice in Malaysia after the dark judicial and legal age of recent past.
It is not only Gani who must give a full and proper accounting as the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad also owes the nation and the world a proper explanation of the appointment of Gani as the new Attorney-General.
DAP calls on Mahathir to make a Ministerial statement in Parliament on Monday to clarify whether Article 145(1) of the Constitution had been complied with in the appointment of Gani Patail as the new Attorney-General and if so, when was the Prime Minister’s advice given and the appointment made by the Yang di Pertuan Agong.
Mahathir should also agree to allow for a full parliamentary debate on his Ministerial statement to immediately follow suit so that nation-wide concerns about Gani’s appointment as the new Attorney-General could be ventilated in Parliament and a proper response given by the government.
Article 145(1) of the Federal Constitution which provides for the appointment
of the Attorney-General reads:
“145(1). The Yang di Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister, appoint a person who is qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court to be the Attorney-General for the Federation”.
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Dr. Rais
Yatim announced on Monday after Datuk Seri Ainum Mohd Saaid had met
him at his Putrajaya office for about 35 minutes and brought her letter
of resignation that Gani would be appointed the new Attorney-General
to take over from Ainum on January 1 and that Gani would assume
the duties of the A-G once Ainum goes on leave “after clearing a few matters”.
It does not appear from the chronology of events on Monday that Rais
was aware of Article 145(1) of the Constitution on the appointment of the
Attorney-General and the need for this constitutional provision to
be complied with, as the various steps that must be taken after Ainum
had submitted her resignation to Rais in their meeting on Monday should
include at least six other separate steps:
It is just unthinkable that all these six steps, not to mention
others, could be completed and complied with in a matter of minutes
between Rais’ receiving Ainum’s letter of resignation and his press conference
announcing Gani’s appointment as the new Attorney-General.
If Article 145(1) of the Constitution had not been complied with, then Gani’s appointment as the new Attorney-General is not valid and constitutional - and the Prime Minister should undertake an open, transparent and consultative process based on criteria which could be made public in order to ensure confidence in the administration of justice in the country.
In his end-of-the-year Bernama interview last December, Mahathir was
asked one question on the judiciary, and the question-and-answer
was given in the following interview transcript:
"Q: In the New Year, we will have a new Attorney-General and a new Chief Justice. Do you hope that with these two appointments, the judiciary can restore public confidence as it has admitted itself that it has lost public confidence, and that there is acrimony between the judges and lawyers?"A: Yes, I think so because people must give some leeway. These are human beings and they have their weakness. They may be in charge but they are not angels. They are not people who are perfect.
"So, they have their problems. We need to have some flexibility in our thinking on the performance of our people.
"I have worked with these people who are very good and some who are very bad, but I think if you know how all these people can deliver."
Mahathir should tell Parliament whether Gani belongs to the “angels”
and in particular, whether he is in the category of the “very good”
or “very bad” who could still “deliver” as far as the government is concerned.
(23/11/2001)