YOURSAY ‘Allegation purely hearsay? Then let that be proven in court.’
Suit by PI Bala's widow against PM struck out
Ferdtan: Americk Sidhu, lawyer for private investigator P Balasubramaniam’s widow, said it all: “I guess in Malaysia, it is not the law which applies, but whom you are suing that matters."
No matter what judge Hasnah Mohamad decided, we know it too well. Tell us, why it is so difficult to sue our PM or top BN government leaders?
Don’t give technical excuses that the widow did not possess the letters of administration documents, failed to state the reasonable cause of action against the defendants (reasonableness is subjective) and lastly the lamest; the family did not file the suit while they were in exile.
Indeed, the judge should not make this irrelevant statement as it has no legal consideration.
As long as it is within the time frame allowed by the law, any person may chose his timing to sue. As said, if a wife of the deceased deemed not to have locus standi to act on his behalf, then who has?
PM Najib Razak had sued Malaysiakini over its readers’ comments, and MP Tony Pua and MP Rafizi Ramli on 1MBD issues. Following the same argument, did PM have locus standi as an individual?
Were the allegations made referred to him personally or were they against the government he led? Criticising PM is synonymous to criticise BN government, and vice versa? Why is it that Najib can sue, but others cannot?
Vijay47: One interesting question Justice Hasnah asked was why Balasubramaniam or his family did not file the suit while they were in exile, or when they returned home last year. Or at any time between 2008 and 2013.
Well, in those years Bala and wife could have gone up to Mount Kailash or danced a jig. So what? As long as the wife initiated the suit within the stipulated period, why is she being questioned about her timing?
Justice Hasnah, are you suggesting that when a plaintiff is given six years to file a suit, he or she does not have six years to do so? Only in Malaysia, folks, only in Malaysia.
Kim Quek: I am glad that Americk is appealing to the higher court on behalf of the family.
The case is so compelling with such overwhelming abundance of evidence of criminal acts against Bala and his family that no court in the democratic world would throw the case away without hearing it.
Gerard Lourdesamy: The suit has been struck off on technical grounds namely the failure to obtain the grant of probate or letters of administration (LA) in a timely manner.
The cause of action it seems was personal to the deceased so the wife must be clothed with the authority to bring the action on behalf of the estate and its beneficiaries.
However, if promises were made directly to the wife and children, then the suit can be maintained on its own provided that limitation had not set in.
The particulars of the alleged conspiracy or deception by the defendants should have been pleaded. But there is no need to establish each ingredient of the tort at the striking out stage.
Perhaps the wife should consider a claim in contract for fraudulent misrepresentation wherein the time only runs from the discovery of the fraud last year but the wife must first get the grant or LA.
Indeed, none of the defendants have been vindicated by this decision.
Anonymous #07451242: Common sense will tell that you first need an LA before you file an action under the estate claim. Foundation in law students in the first semester will know that.
Malaysian 53: PI Bala's widow, A Santamil Selvi, did not have locus standi because the relevant authorities have delayed the issuing of letter of administration to her.
Doesn't this sound typical of Malaysian authorities when they run helter skelter to protect their leader, Najib, and his wife, Rosmah Mansor.
Aren't these people ashamed of themselves to ask even for costs when they together with another crony, Deepak Jaikishan, basically ruined the family totally.
Desperate for Change: The very fact that the Bar Council has taken the steps to invoke disciplinary action against senior lawyer Cecil Abraham, there is definitely a cause of action.
I am very saddened by the way the judge decided on this case. The public depend on you for justice and this is what you do?
Are we all surprised and shocked at this decision? Of course not. What did you expect? Someone to decide fairly?
Well, Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria, despite your assurances , this is the reality of the sad state of affairs of the judiciary in Malaysia. I am so embarrassed.
Lee Hup: All we ordinary Malaysians can do is keep hoping and praying that someday soon God will punish the evil in our country and like a great flood wash away all the devils from our beloved country.
The allegation is purely a conjecture and hearsay? Then let that be proven in court.
Chang Lau: Please receive the court's decision with an open heart. The judge made her decisions and act in accordance with all procedures, regardless of rank or status.
One more thing, I obviously do not see the slightest involvement of the PM and his wife in this matter.
Tholu: It is seemingly getting very possible that Umno has embarked on an aggressive campaign of countering online news portals' unfavourable reports about it through salaried cyber troopers.
However they are acting more like clowns rather than intelligent beings, which is actually a reflection of their masters themselves.
Mohican: A court will only strike out a suit if the suit is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the process of court.
It is only in very rare circumstances a suit will be struck off. The good widow should appeal against this decision. Justice demands that she be heard.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.
