YOURSAY | ‘For this, the task force should hang its head in shame’.

PSM: RCI to probe ex-AG Thomas’ book ‘waste of time and money'

Apanama is back: Instead of reforming the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) and the rest of the investigative agencies, the cabinet is more concerned about a book.

There is no point in having an independent judiciary if agencies such as MACC, police, and AGC are mediocre. There is nothing to be proud of here.

If due to sloppy investigation, our independent judiciary releases a person, we are proud to say we respect the court's decision. It has been going on for far too long and the PM of the day is just keeping quiet. I mean even the past PMs.

Yes, it is a deliberate attempt to stay mediocre, to play safe.

An independent judiciary shall be supported by an equally independent and competent AGC and other investigative agencies. Then I will respect the decision.

In fact, the politicians are using the independence of the judiciary to mask the incompetency of the AGC and the investigative agencies. I hope people are aware of this, especially the lawyers.

Koel: There are two possible RCIs. One is about revenge politics involving personal egos. This will be to castigate Thomas and set an example to future whistleblowers and writers, thereby limiting any possible reform or solving problems.

Such an RCI will show us the levels of the immaturity of grown men and women who operate on their egos rather than what is good for the country.

The second type of RCI will address issues raised in the book - of which there are many. Such an RCI does not go after individuals or whistleblowers - the lowest form of argumentation - but will turn its gaze on improving our country for all of us and not for a few elites.

That would convince us that we are heading towards a newfound maturity in governance.

The question is which type of RCI is the current administration pushing for?

Vijay47: The sorry Tommy Thomas book saga is another in a long litany of shame that we proudly wear on our sleeve. For this, the task force should hang its head in shame.

Thomas’ book carried several allegations - the appointment of judges, interference by the executive in the judiciary, and claims of selective prosecution.

By a strange act of God, all these accusations were somehow missed by the task force – lo and behold, only the perceived sedition and breaking of government secrecy laws by Thomas himself were visible to the probe body.

Any investigative agency worth its salt would have examined the book issue in its entirety – the allegations that Tommy Thomas made, the accusations against Tommy Thomas.

Yet all that the task force saw was his deemed faults and offences, and to offer some mantle of credibility and balance, it piously suggested reforms in the Judicial Appointment Commission. How about the rampaging elephant in the room?

The terms of reference for the task force seem simple and straightforward enough –“Find some gun smoking or not, hands blood-stained or not, and nail him”, almost offering convenient fodder to Ismail Sabri later urging Umno to use the report as political ammo – I do not hold this against the former prime minister of dubious qualification, he is incapable of anything better.

On this score, Law Minister Azalina Othman Said, you are due all respect and salute. Not only have you revived the earlier report, but you also ask that the proposed royal commission examine all aspects of that appropriately named book, “My Story – Justice in the Wilderness”.

If Tommy Thomas is guilty, hang him. If others are guilty, hang them.

Kilimanjaro: The attorney-general (AG) who comes to mind on the 1MDB case when former premier Najib Abdul Razak was ruling the roost was Mohamad Apandi Ali. The AG who did not want to prosecute the perpetrators in the infamous "Lingamgate" was Abdul Ghani Patail. An RCI cited senior lawyer VK Lingam and former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad as the perpetrators.

The huge impact of the 1MDB scandal should have warranted an RCI on its own. The "Lingamgate" episode and incident shook the judiciary. In all these, ears have been closed and eyes have been shut but why now an RCI on Thomas who brought the alleged culprits of 1MDB to court and a former PM had been jailed but there was no action against Apandi.

Thomas helped brought back billions to the country and this is how these people repay him but Apandi never lifted a finger and even ignored the billions. Why no action or RCI on him?

The only reason that comes to mind - the others are Malays and Tommy Thomas is an Indian/non-Malay. What else could it be? It is becoming more cynical by the day that the non-Malays are being alienated.

It is all about one group of Malays trying to save themselves against another group of Malays - well reminded by the proverb ‘Gajah sama gajah berjuang, pelanduk mati di tengah-tengah?’ (African proverb: When two elephants fight, it is the mouse-deer that suffers).

This talk of a "moderate" Malaysia is all just talk only. What action is being taken against the Permatang Pauh MP Muhammad Fawwaz Mohamad Jan who pokes his nose into something that does not concern Muslims?

And please just answer this question - do I as a non-Malay have equal rights as the Malays or the Constitution is just a piece of paper?

Bosku Merpati: Whatever it is, Mahathir had the guts to appoint Thomas who netted several people and brought home billions of the 1MDB loot, he also appointed Richard Malanjum and then Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat to their jobs as Chief Justices.

It seems, there is a broad proposed scope for the RCI but I hope it is not an attempt to trap Thomas to satisfy a particular lobby.

Let’s see what the full terms of reference are, and who is appointed to chair and constitute the RCI including its members.

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. In the past 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.