In a court of law, the onus is on the prosecutor to prove that the accused is guilty. The accused need not have to prove that he is innocent. But Dr Mahathir Mohamad appears to think otherwise in his accusations against Pak Lah.

Instead of proving that Pak Lah and his government are guilty of selling out the country in the 'crooked bridge' matter, he wants Pak Lah to prove his innocence by opening up all communications with Singapore pertaining to the bridge.

Pak Lah and his team have tried but the Tun is not happy with what has been released so far. He maintains that unless the government reveals all communications publicly, Pak Lah and his team are guilty as charged (by Tun).

If we agree that the Tun is justified in his demands for Pak Lah (the accused) to prove his innocence comprehensively and conclusively, then we should apply this rule to all and we can start off with the Tun himself.

Mahathir has been accused by many, including more recently by Anwar Ibrahim, of various corrupt practices when he was in power. The recent revelation by the ex-boss of MAS, Tajudin Ramli, certainly supports such accusations against him.

The Tun, without any delay, should therefore open up all past communications on matters where he is the accused. He can start off with Petronas and open up its books for all to see.

Then follow-up with MAS, the IPPs, Bank Negara, the APs, etc. The Tun would only then be morally justified to ask Pak Lah and his team to prove their innocence in the 'crooked bridge' matter.

Otherwise, the Tun should just accept the government's explanations on the 'crooked bridge' issue and bring it to a close so that we can move on.