Thursday, March 8, 2012
Altantuya murder: There was a "motive", but it can't be revealed or Putrajaya will crumble
The long awaited but only just concluded verdict by Shah Alam High Court
Judge, Mohd Zaki Md Yasin on the Mongolian Altantuya case is not only
causing a spasmodic arrest within the legal circuit in Malaysia but is
also the very talk of the simpletons – Ahmad, Muthu and Ah Beng
nationwide.
Legal students and practicing professionals are shocked at the Judge’s
conclusion. Teaching lawyers will have nightmares in trying to make
sense of the verdict that has completely negated “motive” from murders.
The learned Judge is reported to have said that “motive, although relevant, has never been the essential to constitute murder.”
Now even High School students are asking if motive is not essential then
what is, in so far as a murder goes? Just the act of killing? Or just
the person who carried out the actual killing?
Malaysia's legal standards under the spotlight
The Judge’s verdict also places Malaysia’s legal standards on the global
legal table of scrutiny. It has far reaching ramification not only from
the socio-political perspective of human rights but also from
socio-economic as well as judicial dimensions.
Indeed we have with this concluding verdict demonstrated to the world in
no uncertain terms that the way we interpret the law around here need
not conform to what universally acceptable law books teach and how
justice is dispensed in the democratic worldover.
In our own backyard, this verdict also delves a lethal blow to the
government of the day. Voters will all the more connect one plus one and
make three. The BN party will be the one that must now carry this yoke
of suspicion transpiring from the conclusion of the judge.
Why would 2 special squad cops want to do such a thing without 'motivation'
Citizens are asking a simple yet profound and logical question: How
could two trained, disciplined and uniformed members of the elite forces
who are known and reputed to carry out their duties to the last letter
of command have killed (murdered) a helpless, unarmed, defenseless and
solitary woman?
People are asking, even the very murder was planned to completely
annihilate all traces of evidence by blowing a fragile female lass with
deadly military grade C4 explosives and yet “motive’ is not “essential”?
The Judge stated that ‘motive (is) relevant’. But he went on to disqualify the crucial importance of motive in this case.
And so the citizens are now asking why. Why is motive not essential in
this grisly, brutal and heinous crime against humanity when all
indicators bleep that motive was the cause of the murder? They are
reasoning at kopitiam outlets in the big cities and the humble warongs
in villages that how could two salaried, uniformed and specially tasked
armed personnel carry out this murder of helpless lady with whom they
had no relationship with nor knowledge of?
But there was a "motive"
People are saying that there was a motive for the act of killing to take
place. And they want the law to establish that motive so that the
person or persons who are party to the crime will be dealt with by the
law adequately and with fair justice.
But alas, “motive” has just flown out of the window of Malaysia’s
judiciary. The precedent has been set. The rakyat are drawing down their
blinds. There is now a foregone conclusion in the minds and hearts of
the citizens here – a verdict that will be almost insurmountable in the
resurrection of Malaysia’s justice system and its reputation.
Some citizens are even going the distance to say that if this transpired
in another civil and democratic nation, by now the entire legal
fraternity would have downed their tools of trade and demanded
right-thinking action. Will this happen in Malaysia? Only time can tell.
But in the meantime the credibility of leaders and political parties
and government systems have been dealt a lethal blow by this verdict on
the Altantuya case.
Malaysia Chronicle
It seems the issue been buried.... or this election will explode again...
ReplyDelete