Just another WordPress.com site

RCI: Opposition Propaganda Denies Justice

The Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock started of on Monday with a barrage of baseless but politically charged arguments from the counsels.
Opposition heavyweights Karpal and Gobind Singh dominated the whole inquiry with their unrelenting prejudiced and bias remarks that insult the intelligence of the highly experienced bench.
The father and son team waged a bitter war against their learned counterparts who are summoned out of the Attorney-General Chambers (AGC) to render nation service by assisting the Inquiry Commissioners in their legal capacity as qualified legal experts.
However, Karpal and Gobind does not realise that they are DAP politicians too. It seems that they are trying to generate as much attention as possible by casting doubt on the credibility of the ‘conducting officers’ who are neutral citizens assisting the Commissioners of Inquiry without subscribing to any personal agenda or political beliefs.
Although the duo alleged that the conducting officers are partial to the government, both failed to note that they are politicians with a political agenda too.
Karpal is DAP chairman and Bukit Gelugor parliamentarian while his son Gobind, a rising star in the party, is the Puchong member of parliament.
Their presence in court surely cast much doubt on their role as sympathetic counsels representing the family of the deceased.
The unfairness of this has certainly rubbed on members of the public who are watching the inquiry via live telecast outside Civil Court 3.
Are they trying to confuse the public by discrediting the conducting officers’ reputation to sow the seeds of distrust to shore up support for their political party and beliefs?
Both also insisted that controversial forensic pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand to be among those to testify in the inquiry.
Dr Pornthip’s questionable academic credentials should be given due consideration as she may not be qualified to give a professional’s view on the serious matter at hand.
The Thai pathologist is also prone to making contradictory claims, as evident during the inquest.
During the inquiry, Karpal Singh’s untimely mention of other inappropriate issues such as Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial as well as the V.K. Lingam scandal raised the ire of the Commission Chairman Tan Sri James Foong Cheng Yuen who had to patiently reason with the politician cum lawyer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s