The Federal Court today unanimously ruled that a court of law cannot review the findings of the royal commission of inquiry into the infamous VK Lingam video.

In setting aside a Court of Appeal order , the three-member panel found that the commission’s role is merely to investigate the issue and not to come to any decision.

NONE “But there is another more important reason. We are of the view that there is a strong policy consideration that it is against public interest to allow the findings of the commission to be challenged in our courts,” said Justice Md Raus Sharif, who read out the landmark judgment.

He pointed out that a number of commissions had been set up under the Commission of Enquiry Act 1950, with none to their knowledge that were challenged by way of a judicial review.

Raus stressed that, should a judicial review be granted on the commission’s findings, it would render the work of such a body a “meaningless exercise, and also a waste of public funds”.

The whole purpose of setting up a commission is to carry out a factual investigation and to make recommendations for the betterment of the judiciary, which has suffered a severe blow in terms of public confidence, he noted.

“Obviously, it is not in the best interests of the judiciary and the nation as a whole to allow such debate and bad perceptions to continue without the public knowing the truth of the matter,” reads the judgment.

“Now that the commission has come out with its findings, it does not make any sense if such findings are allowed to be reviewed by our courts.”

azlan The panel also rejected the argument posited by Lingam and the other two respondents that they were adversely affected by the royal commission’s findings. The judges pointed out that the findings and recommendations remain just that.

They acknowledged that, by stating that there was sufficient grounds to take action against those mentioned in the video under the Sedition Act 1972 and the Penal Code, the commission had made “strong findings” that implicated the respondents.

However, the panel maintained that the commission’s findings “remain mere findings”, and do not directly affect or deprive the respondents of their legal rights.

“Thus, in ... VK Lingam’s case here, despite the commission’s findings that he had committed criminal misbehaviour, his status as an advocate and solicitor is intact. The fact that he is appearing before us is a clear testimony that his legal rights have not been adversely affected.

“Similarly, for ... Ahmad Fairuz Dato Sheikh Abdul Halim and ...Mohd Eusoff Chin, it is not shown to us that they have been deprived of the benefits which they had been permitted to enjoy before.

“Clearly, the commission’s findings have not affected their legal rights and (are) therefore not amenable to judicial review.”

Commission different from tribunal

Justice Raus, in further explaining the judgment, said the panel could not agree with Lingam’s argument that the commission is similar to “any other inferior tribunal” where its decisions are always subject to judicial review.

The various tribunals set up are open to judicial review as the decisions made are “legal decisions”, unlike in the case of a RCI which “merely investigates and does not decide”, Justice Raus said.

“Its findings and recommendations are not binding on anybody, not even the government,” he added.

vk lingam tape judge fixing fiasco 210907 sequence 01 The apex court’s decision brings to a close a long-running drama surrounding the controversial video, in which the commission implicated six people for alleged fixing of judicial appointments.

Aside from Lingam, Eusoff and Ahmad Fairuz, the RCI recommended that probes be carried out on tycoon Vincent Tan, Umno secretary-general and then Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor and former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed.

Mahathir was the only one in the group who did not seek a judicial review of the commission’s findings.