VK Lingam fails to set aside six months' jail sentence

A five-member Federal Court bench today dismissed the review application by senior lawyer VK Lingam to set aside his six months conviction for contempt of court, with regards to an allegation he made that a Federal Court judge had plagiarised a judgment.

Chief Justice Richard Malanjum, who led the bench, ruled that Lingam did not meet the threshold under Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules 1995 to review the decision made by another bench.

"We unanimously dismiss the appeal as it did not pass the threshold.

"Furthermore Order 32 is not applicable here as Order 52 (for committal proceeding ) applies. No order is made as to costs," Justice Malanjum said.

The other judges were Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice David Wong Dak Wah, and Federal Court judges Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Idrus Harun.

Order 32 of Rules of Court 2012 only applies to applications of proceedings made in chambers.

Lingam is still overseas and has not returned home to serve the sentence meted out late last year.

His lawyer, R Thayalan, submitted and told the court that an ex-parte order for contempt could be set aside under Order 32 by the Federal Court.

He said that the earlier bench had not considered Lingam's defence against the contempt proceeding initiated against him.

"My client's right of natural justice had been breached as he was not allowed to be heard," he said.

This led to Justice Malanjum's retort that Lingam had been given many opportunities by the court to come back to defend himself.

Thayalan, however, said his client cannot come back as he cannot endure travel by long flights due to his injury.

"He is prepared to be in court via video conferencing even," the lawyer argued.

"Based on his (Lingam's) defence not being heard, the contempt proceeding should not have proceeded," the lawyer said.

Senior federal counsel Alice Loke (photo) told the bench that the contempt proceeding had been postponed many times and Lingam had been given every opportunity to appear since 2012, when the contempt proceeding was initiated.

Furthermore, Loke said Lingam did not meet the threshold for a review to set aside the conviction and sentencing.

"There is no bias in the sentencing and the conviction and sentence are justified," she reiterated, adding that there is evidence to show that Lingam managed to travel from the United States to the United Kingdom to renew his passport.

Thayalan replied that there has been no affidavit in reply made by the Attorney-General's Chambers to Lingam's defence to set aside the conviction, and that shows his client's right was affected.

As a result, he said his client's defence was not considered by the previous bench which passed the conviction and sentence and that such actions are wrong in law.

Despite this, the bench dismissed the appeal.

It was reported in November 2017 that the apex court had sentenced Lingam to six months' jail after finding him guilty of contempt for accusing a member of the bench of being involved in plagiarism.

"A warrant of committal is issued and the sentence will proceed forthwith," Justice Abu Samah had said in delivering the judgment.

In September 2017, another five-member bench, led by the then Chief Justice Md Raus Sharif, had also dismissed Lingam's application for a review of the decision made by the apex court, by not accepting his medical report and ruling that it was forged. - Mkini