1. A Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim has been filed in the Kuala Lumpur High Court on the 11th June 2014 on behalf of A. Santamil Selvi a/p Alau Malay @ Anna Malay (Selvi) and her 3 children, Kishen, Menaga and Reeshi, the Plaintiffs.
2. Selvi is the widow of the late Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal (PI Bala) who passed away on the 15 March 2013. Selvi represents herself, her 3 children and the estate of PI Bala.
3. The cause of action upon which this claim is based is the tort of conspiracy to injure by unlawful means or by unlawful acts.
4. The Plaintiffs are claiming loss and damage occasioned as a result of being forcibly removed from Malaysia against their respective wills on the 4 July 2008, allegedly arranged by threat and/or inducement, and perpetrated, by the Defendants, who are alleged to have conspired with each other in ensuring the Plaintiffs and the late PI Bala were evacuated from this country and made to reside in Chennai, India for almost 5 years.
5. The Defendants named in this Suit are:
I. Datuk Seri Najib Razak
II. Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor
III. Datuk Johari Razak
IV. Datukj Nazim Razak
V. Tan Sri Cecil Abraham
VI. Sunil Abraham
VII. Zainal Abidin Bin Muhayat
VIII. Deepak Jaikishan
IX. Arunampalam A/L Mariampillai
6. The Plaintiffs are claiming damages for the expenses incurred whilst in forced exile in Chennai which include the cost of accommodation, transportation, school fees, loss of salaries of both PI Bala and Selvi and the mental anguish suffered by all Plaintiffs as a result thereof.
7. This claim has only been filed now due to the very recent emergence of new evidence linking the sequence of events which took place on the night of the 3rd July and morning of the 4th July 2008 and which now appears to implicate all the Defendants as having combined to play significant roles in perpetrating this alleged wrong doing against the Plaintiffs and the deceased.
8. We believe we now have more than sufficient evidence to prove the Plaintiffs claims against all the Defendants.
9. The contents of the Statement of Claim filed are self explanatory.
10. The matter has been fixed for Case management on the 23 June 2014 before the Registrar of the High Court, Puan Norfauzani Binti Mohd Nordin and the Judge appointed to hear this matter is Justice Datuk Wira Kamaludin Bin Md. Said of Court NCVC 9.
11. Service of process is being attended to at this point in time.
12. It is worth emphasising that the Defendants are being sued in their personal capacities as individuals and there is therefore no intended link to either the Government of Malaysia or any particular political party.
13. The remedies sought are purely civil in nature and are based on allegations of a conspiracy between all the Defendants using unlawful means or unlawful acts to cause injury or damage to the Plaintiffs and the deceased.
14. It is necessary to release this press statement at this stage as there have been reports appearing in the online media which may not be entirely precise.
Americk Sidhu
(Solicitor for the Plaintiffs)
14th June 2014
FZ
Promoting Thinking Minds Via Rational Rationale
Showing posts with label Altantuya. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Altantuya. Show all posts
Saturday, 14 June 2014
Friday, 9 May 2014
Disciplinary action against lawyer in Altantuya case on hold after counsel removes himself
A lawyer for the Bar Council has removed himself from the ongoing disciplinary proceedings against corporate lawyer Tan Sri Cecil Abraham for allegedly preparing a statutory declaration (SD) for the late private investigator P. Balasubramaniam (pic), who was not his client.
Sources told The Malaysian Insider said senior lawyer Lambert Rasaratnam was not comfortable to lead evidence and cross-examine Abraham because of a "latest development", which was not specified.
A source familiar with the proceedings declined to go into detail what triggered Rasaratnam from appearing for the Bar Council, which is the complainant in the case.
"The proceeding is stuck as the council is looking for a replacement lawyer," a source told The Malaysian Insider.
It is understood that because of the personality involved in this disciplinary hearing and the possibility of other senior lawyers stepping forward to be in involved one capacity or another in the hearing, lawyers with the necessary seniority and standing have been slow to offer their help.
Legal circles said it would be a shame if this disciplinary hearing comes unstuck because senior lawyers are uneasy over a face-off with a prominent member of the Bar.
Disciplinary proceedings against Abraham started in March and the next hearing is scheduled later this month with Balasubramaniam's lawyer, Americk Singh Sidhu, slated to take the stand.
Abraham is being investigated by a three-man Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board (ASDB) committee for professional misconduct.
The contentious sworn statement was to counter Balasubramaniam's first sworn statement, which had incriminated Datuk Seri Najib Razak and several other personalities in relation to the 2006 murder of Mongolian interpreter Altantuya Shaariibuu.
The ASDB decided to hold the proceedings after finding there was a prima facie case against the lawyer for professional misconduct.
The committee, comprising two lawyers and a layman, is looking into alleged misconduct under Section 94 of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) 1976 for "conduct or omission to act by a lawyer in a professional capacity which amounts to grave impropriety".
"This misconduct is in relation to Abraham, who is alleged to have drafted the SD for Balasubramaniam, when the late private investigator was not his client.
"At all material times, Americk was on record as the counsel for Balasubramaniam," a source said.
The Bar Council lodged a complaint against Abraham to the ASDB last year and council chairman Christopher Leong appeared in March before the committee to give evidence in a closed-door session.
The ASDB, which is a body independent of the Bar Council, is statutorily tasked to investigate professional misconduct.
Americk would be the next witness to appear before the committee while carpet dealer Deepak Jaikishan is also slated to testify.
Deepak had earlier admitted that he helped to get Balasubramaniam repudiate his first SD by finding two lawyers to draft the new statement.
Americk had thrown light on the contentious SD when he read out a prepared statement at the Malaysian Bar's 67th annual general meeting (AGM) last year where he had said: "Tan Sri Cecil Abraham admitted to me that he was the one who drafted the second statutory declaration".
Americk later told reporters at the sidelines of the AGM that the directive to Abraham came from Najib, who was then the deputy prime minister.
"I'm not interested in lodging a complaint with the board. That is not my agenda. My agenda is just to find out who instructed him to do it," he had said.
Leong, had also on the sidelines of the AGM, had suggested that the Attorney-General’s Chambers relook Altantuya’s case based on evidence from Americk’s revelation, as well as Deepak’s admittance of involvement in the case.
“Much has been said about the obvious lack of motive for the two police officers to commit the crime. That remains the unanswered question,” Leong had said.
Two former police commandos – Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar and Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri – who were charged with Altantuya's murder, were found guilty and sentenced to death by the Shah Alam High Court.
Their convictions, however, were overturned by the Court of Appeal last year.
Putrajaya is appealing the decision by the Court of Appeal. Former political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda, who was charged with abetting them, was also acquitted in 2008.
Balasubramaniam or "PI Bala" accused several top federal government personalities of being involved in Altantuya's murder in his first SD in 2008, two years after the woman's murder.
But he retracted the SD the following day and signed a new one, where the names of the personalities, including Najib, were omitted.
Bala died of a heart attack on March 15 last year, weeks after returning home from self-exile.
Lawyers familiar with disciplinary proceedings said the committee would make its findings and recommendations to the board, including the punishment to be meted out for misconduct.
Under the LPA, a lawyer found guilty of misconduct could be reprimanded, fined, suspended from practice for up to five years, or struck off the roll. – May 9, 2014.
The Malaysian Insider
Sources told The Malaysian Insider said senior lawyer Lambert Rasaratnam was not comfortable to lead evidence and cross-examine Abraham because of a "latest development", which was not specified.
A source familiar with the proceedings declined to go into detail what triggered Rasaratnam from appearing for the Bar Council, which is the complainant in the case.
"The proceeding is stuck as the council is looking for a replacement lawyer," a source told The Malaysian Insider.
It is understood that because of the personality involved in this disciplinary hearing and the possibility of other senior lawyers stepping forward to be in involved one capacity or another in the hearing, lawyers with the necessary seniority and standing have been slow to offer their help.
Legal circles said it would be a shame if this disciplinary hearing comes unstuck because senior lawyers are uneasy over a face-off with a prominent member of the Bar.
Disciplinary proceedings against Abraham started in March and the next hearing is scheduled later this month with Balasubramaniam's lawyer, Americk Singh Sidhu, slated to take the stand.
Abraham is being investigated by a three-man Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board (ASDB) committee for professional misconduct.
The contentious sworn statement was to counter Balasubramaniam's first sworn statement, which had incriminated Datuk Seri Najib Razak and several other personalities in relation to the 2006 murder of Mongolian interpreter Altantuya Shaariibuu.
The ASDB decided to hold the proceedings after finding there was a prima facie case against the lawyer for professional misconduct.
The committee, comprising two lawyers and a layman, is looking into alleged misconduct under Section 94 of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) 1976 for "conduct or omission to act by a lawyer in a professional capacity which amounts to grave impropriety".
"This misconduct is in relation to Abraham, who is alleged to have drafted the SD for Balasubramaniam, when the late private investigator was not his client.
"At all material times, Americk was on record as the counsel for Balasubramaniam," a source said.
The Bar Council lodged a complaint against Abraham to the ASDB last year and council chairman Christopher Leong appeared in March before the committee to give evidence in a closed-door session.
The ASDB, which is a body independent of the Bar Council, is statutorily tasked to investigate professional misconduct.
Americk would be the next witness to appear before the committee while carpet dealer Deepak Jaikishan is also slated to testify.
Deepak had earlier admitted that he helped to get Balasubramaniam repudiate his first SD by finding two lawyers to draft the new statement.
Americk had thrown light on the contentious SD when he read out a prepared statement at the Malaysian Bar's 67th annual general meeting (AGM) last year where he had said: "Tan Sri Cecil Abraham admitted to me that he was the one who drafted the second statutory declaration".
Americk later told reporters at the sidelines of the AGM that the directive to Abraham came from Najib, who was then the deputy prime minister.
"I'm not interested in lodging a complaint with the board. That is not my agenda. My agenda is just to find out who instructed him to do it," he had said.
Leong, had also on the sidelines of the AGM, had suggested that the Attorney-General’s Chambers relook Altantuya’s case based on evidence from Americk’s revelation, as well as Deepak’s admittance of involvement in the case.
“Much has been said about the obvious lack of motive for the two police officers to commit the crime. That remains the unanswered question,” Leong had said.
Two former police commandos – Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar and Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri – who were charged with Altantuya's murder, were found guilty and sentenced to death by the Shah Alam High Court.
Their convictions, however, were overturned by the Court of Appeal last year.
Putrajaya is appealing the decision by the Court of Appeal. Former political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda, who was charged with abetting them, was also acquitted in 2008.
Balasubramaniam or "PI Bala" accused several top federal government personalities of being involved in Altantuya's murder in his first SD in 2008, two years after the woman's murder.
But he retracted the SD the following day and signed a new one, where the names of the personalities, including Najib, were omitted.
Bala died of a heart attack on March 15 last year, weeks after returning home from self-exile.
Lawyers familiar with disciplinary proceedings said the committee would make its findings and recommendations to the board, including the punishment to be meted out for misconduct.
Under the LPA, a lawyer found guilty of misconduct could be reprimanded, fined, suspended from practice for up to five years, or struck off the roll. – May 9, 2014.
The Malaysian Insider
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)