Karpal perplexed by CJ’s letter on ‘copycat’ judge

Karpal Singh says he wants a royal commission of inquiry and a tribunal against the 'copycat' judge and is suprised by CJ's letter to him that there is no case against Abdul Malik.

PETALING JAYA: A perplexed Bukit Gelugor MP and veteran lawyer Karpal Singh has denied that he had asked for ‘copycat’ judge Abdul Malik Ishak to be investigated.

“What I want is a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) and a tribunal set up under Article 125 (3) of the Federal Constitution to enquire into the plagiarism allegations against Malik under the laws that existed in 2000.

“For the record I have not made any complaint to Chief Justice (Arifin Zakaria) in relation to misconduct on the part of Malik,” he said in a statement today.

Karpal was responding to a letter that he received from Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria where the latter stated that Karpal’s complaint had no merit and has been dismissed in accordance to Section 13 (1) of Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009.

According to Karpal, he had written a letter to Malik on Aug 22, indicating his intention to move a motion against him in parliament under Article 127 for misconduct in relation to the plagiarism.

“There was no reply from Malik. I was promoted to write another letter to him on Sept 29 stating that as was no response to my allegation, it left me with no alternative but to move a substantive motion against him.

“I also stated that I was extending the letter dated Aug 22 to the Chief Justice and president of the Court of Appeal,” Karpal said.

CJ: Claim has no merit
CJ Arifin meanwhile said the complaint linking Abdul Malik with plagiarising a Singapore court judgement in 2000 had no merit.

A statement from the Chief Justice’s Office issued by Arifin’s special officer I, Che Wan Zaidi Che Wan Ibrahim, said the decision was reached after investigations and a discussion with Appeal Court president Md Raus Sharif.

“The CJ carried out an investigation. Based on his findings and after discussing with the Court of Appeal president in accordance with Section 13(1) of the Judges Code of Ethics 2009, the CJ is of the opinion that Karpal’s allegations of plagiarism by the Appeal Court judge has no merit and the complaint is hereby rejected,” said Che Wan Zaidi.

He said the CJ received a complaint letter dated Sept 29, 2011 from Karpal which claimed that an Appeal Court judge had plagiarised the judgement of a Singapore court judge.

Karpal had been officially informed of the matter in a letter from the CJ’s office, said Che Wan Zaidi.

‘Malik has seven days’

Karpal said that he received a reply from the CJ on Oct 13 asking for ‘more specific information’ in relation to his allegations.

“I responded (to the CJ) by letter dated Oct 27 stating that the law minister at that time, Rais Yatim, had publicly stated that he knew about the allegations of plagiarism and was aware of the investigations (by the Singapore judiciary),” he said.

Karpal went on to add that on Dec 7 he had again written to the CJ indicating that the parliamentary motions that he put up against Malik had lapsed (on Dec 1) and that “he had no alternative but to seek other measures.”

“Following this I wrote an open letter dated Dec 27 to Malik calling upon him to step down or file a suit against me for defamation.

“I gave him seven days to reply, failing which I would take it as a public admission that he was guilty of plagiarism,” said Karpal.

Karpal, had in October, revealed that the Singapore judiciary had identified Malek as having plagiarised the judgment of Singapore High Court judge GP Selvam in 2000.

Malik was found to have copied Selvam’s judgment on a copyright case while serving as Johor High Court judge in 2000.

Karpal had earlier in parliament called for Malik’s immediate resignation saying it would save the Malaysian judiciary from further embarrassment. Malik is currently a Court of Appeal judge.