RESPONSE TO MATTHIAS CHANG

Response to Matthias Chang

I am just wondering what is wrong with this fellow Matthias Chang ? Mahatir is already “suda penchen”, so what is this Mattahias fellow so hot under his collar about. Is he trying to posture himself as a man of great principle or is he merely tryimg to buy himself his “15 minutes of fame ?” This man thinks he is a great hero, but to my thinking he is an arsehole licker.

Mahatir is the most evil influence that ever held sway over the unfortunate fate of Malaysia and it is he who has put Malaysia at the bottom rung of the ladder of economic competitiveness as identified in many studies on the issue. Mahatir used the most vicious tool to retain political power. ie race politics and race divisiveness. It is Mahatir who exploited the greed and self centeredness of Chinese politicians in the MCA; as a consequence of his evil influence, Malaysia is today what it is and what it has always been, a country that is divided by race and the wholesale abuse of the national treasure that only went into the pockets of politicians of the ruling government.

That is definitely something very wrong with this arsehole Matthias Chang. I think it is more a case of Matthias Chang trying to exploit his service with Mahatir to attract attention. He has challenged Cumarasamy to a debate; to what end ? Is he trying to prove that he is a more competent debater than is Cumarasamy ? What will that achieve ? It would appear that Cumarasamy is merely ignoring him as one of no consequence. Has he thought about that ?

Coming back to the ridiculous suggestion that is posed by this Matthias Cheng fellow, that this Judge should be prosecuted for sedition etc., let me remind him that the last time that I read the Malaysian Constitution, JUDGES CAN ONLY BE SACKED BY A RESOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT. Having said that maybe this Judge wants a debate of the woeful state of the Malaysian Judiciary in Parliament. I believe his name is Ian Chin, and from what has passed we have to assume that Judge Ian Chin is a very tough minded judge and knows what he wants. If we assume that that is what Judge Ian Chin had in mind, then why does the Barisan national RAISE THIS ISSUE IN PARLIAMENT AND TO CALL FOR ANOTHER ROYAL COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY ?

I am posting a couple of letters that I had written to the Attorney General, Chief Judge of Malaysia, President of the Court of Appeal, President & Secretary of Malaysian Bar and many practicing lawyers copies of these letters. My Charge against Judge Dato Zainon binti Mohd. Ali, judge of the Malaysian Federal Court, that she criminally aided & Abetted respondents Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, Wong Kem Chen & Kwong Sea Yoon to commit perjury, forgery, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, obstructing a criminal investigation, Malfeasance, and among others, conspiracy to obtain money under false pretences; when she adjudicated my wife’s Originating Petition

Re : Originating Petition No. D2-26-41 OF 2001 ;
Lim Choi Yin v. McLaren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd

I call upon Mr Matthias Chang to defend Judge dato zainon binti Mohd. Ali with as much vigor as he has doen for Mahatir.

The letters that I want posted are set re-printed below :

Yap Chong Yee,
5a Prinsep Road,
Attadale, WA 6156
Date : 27th May, 2008
Email :ychongyee@yahoo.com.au
Blogg. http://yapchongyee.blogspot.com
To,

Dato Zaid Ibrahim, Minister of Law
Putra Jaya, Malaysia,

Dear YANG AHMAD BERHORMAT,

Re: Re : Originating Petition No. D2-26-41 OF 2001 ;
Lim Choi Yin v. McLaren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd

I have written to you on the above matter a few times but I have still not received any reply, ant even an acknowledgement.

Yang Amat Berhormat, is it not the law that a presiding judge has the duty TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ANY CRIMINAL OFFENCES COMMITTED BY ANY LITIGANT or party to the Court Proceedings ?

I refer YAB to my wife’s above Petition. My wife’s supporting affidavits had annexed as exhibits copies of 3 police reports charging the respondents Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, Wong Kem Chen and Kwong Sea Yoon with PERJURY, FORGERY and fabrication of evidence. The signatures of the forged documents when compared to their true signatures of my wife’s clearly show discrepancy and in spit of these irregularities, JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI refused to give my wife leave to cross examine the said respondents for PERJURY & FORGERY. Her refusal to give leave to my wife to cross examine the said respondents under these circumstances CONSTITUTES AIDING & ABETTING THE RESPONDENTS IN THE COMMISSION OF THESE CRIMINAL OFFENCES. To support my charges against Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali for aiding & abetting the criminal respondents I ENCLOSE A COPY OF ONE OF THE 3 POLICE REPORTS; a police report made at the police station at Jalan Tun HS Lee, KL.

I have been writing many letters to various VIP for an extended period of at least 2 years AND TO DATE I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY REPLY NOT EVEN AN ACKNOWLEDGE. Is it not the reason for drawing no acknowledgement from any of you VIPs the fact that if you had knowledge of such criminal behaviour, you are required by law to take action ? That being the case you have chosen to remain MUTE ? The facts of my wife’s petition & circumstances of the court process that followed is sufficient EVIDENCE to convict Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali for the criminal offences that I charged her with.




Yang Amat Berhormat, WILL YOU NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THIS ONE LETTER ? This letter will be posted on the blogsite of “Cakap tak suropa bekin” (check MALAYSIANS UNPLUGGED, and my own blogg. at http://yap.chongyee.blogspot.com ).

I give you my word that I shall come to KL to confront Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali in court; soon after the Olympics and hopefully by September, 16 I will have to contend with the government of Pakatan Rakyat and hope that I will get a little more JUSTICE BEFORE THE LAW !


Your’s faithfully,


Yapchongyee

COPY : Judge zainon binti Mohd. Ali, President of Court of Appeal, President & Secretary of Malaysian Bar, Chief Justice.

Yap Chong Yee,
5a Prinsep Road,
Attadale, W. Australia,
Date :
To,
The President,
Court of Appeal,
Putra Jaya, Malaysia,

Your Honour (YAA),

Re :KL High Court Originating Petition No. : D2-26-41-2001
Lim Choi Yin v. McLaren Saksama(Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. & 5 others.

I finally want the world to know and for you to know my final bit of fact about the criminal behaviour of Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali. I withheld this information because my humanity saddened me to have to reveal this fact and expose the Police Investigating officer to possible RETRIBUTION and that will be very unfortunate for the further progress of the career of this officer. However, be that as it may, the truth is the truth and since I want my story to be told, I have a duty to myself to reveal all.

This incident relates to my own first police report, because there were in fact a total of 3 police reports made; my wife had made the 1st police report stating that she had NEVER EVER PASSED ANY COMPANY RESOLUTION WHEN SHE WAS THE PROMOTER DIRECTOR OF THE RESPONDENT COMPANY, RELIONUS ADJUSTERS SDN. BHD, and that the resolution allegedly passed by Stephen Lim Cheng Ban as proposer and Wong Kem Chen as seconder together with my wife as the third participating director.attending the meeting was a lie.

Stephen Lim Cheng Ban & Wong Kem Chen FABRICATED this alleged resolution because for all the time of the existence of the company up to this day, THERE is still no legitimate and LAWFUL document TO EVIDENCE the share holding of Wong Kem Chen as a share holder in the company; therefore the purpose of the alleged company resolution alleging that my wife participated in the passing of this said resolution WAS TO SHOW THAT AT THE TIME OF THE PASSING OF THIS FABRICATED DOCUMENT, Wong Kem Chen was a director of the company and this alleged fabricated document was invented to evidence the alleged share participation of Wong kem Chen as share holder of the company.. The full significance of this story will be told at the trial of this petition, because with the conspiracy of all the participants except for my wife, many of the documents have been made to go missing.

Having recited the background circumstances of my revelation, at the time that I made my first police report, I told this police officer investigating (his name is inspector FAWZI of the Balai Police Jalan Tun HS Lee KL, that this case will make him very famous because one of the parties involved was the son of the late Tun Hussein Onn (HARRIS BIN HUSSEIN ONN) and that if this case comes up his name will become famous. He then assured me that he will immediately go to see superior and that he will attend to the case immediately. I later telephoned him and he told me that he had gone to see the Judge about the case, but he was told by the judge NOT TO INVESTIGATE THE CASE. This will make Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali,an accomplice after the fact for aiding & abetting the co-conspirators Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, Wong Kem Chen, Kwong Sea Yoon, AND NOT LEAST THE PARTICIPATION OF JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD ALI . Her action constitutes PARTICIPATION IN A CONSPIRACY TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE AND ACTION TO HINDER THE PROGRESS OF A POLICE INVESTIGATION.

Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali may well say that the right time for police investigation into PERJURY (the charge that I made in my police report) is after the TRIAL; but that only underscores my charge against Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali for hindering a police investigation & for aiding & abetting PERJURY; because if the right time for investigating the PERJURY IS AFTER THE TRIAL, then the justification for so alleging by Judge zainon binti Mohd. Ali must be that respondents must be allowed to DEFEND THEMSELVES UNDER CROSS EXAMINATION, free of any doubt that may arise from any police investigation conducted BEFORE THE CROSS EXAMINATION IN COURT; but in our case Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali KNOWING FULL WELL THAT A POLICE REPORT HAD BEEN MADE CHARGING THE 3 CRIMINAL AMIGOES with Perjury, REFUSED PETITIONER’S APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO CROSS EXAMINATION. This is straight, uncomplicated and incontrovertible evidence against Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali for aiding & abetting respondents in a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, abuse of her judicial powers to hinder a police investigation. That and many more, but why bother with more; just these couple of offences if convicted will put Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali in JAIL for a few years. JUDGE OF THE MALAYSIAN FEDERAL COURT JAILED FOR PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE.

THE BIG QUESTION THAT I WANT TO ASK THE PRIME MINISTER & THE MALAYSIAN JUDICIARY AS A WHOLE, IS IT WORTH THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CREDIBILITY OF THE MALAYSIAN JUDICIARY TO PROTECT FROM PROSECUTION OF 3 CRIMINALS ?

IT CAN ONLY HAPPEN IN MALAYSIA !

Yours faithfully


Yapchongyee

COPY :

(1)Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali, (2) President & Secretary Malaysian Bar Council (3)Attorney General, Malaysia (4) Mr David Hoh, M/s Lim & Hoh
(5)Email to all & Sundry of Practicing Lawyers of Malaysia
(^0To all reporters of Singapore Straits Times.

NOTICE : THERE ARE STILL MORE AT MY BLOGG.

http://yap.chongyee.blogspot.com

LETTER TO MINISTER OF LAW

Yap Chong Yee,
5a Prinsep Road,
Attadale, WA 6156
Date : 2nd June, 2008
Email :ychongyee@yahoo.com.au
Blogg. http://yapchongyee.blogspot.com
To,
Dato Zaid Ibrahim, Minister of Law
Putra Jaya, Malaysia,

Dear YANG AHMAD BERHORMAT,

Re: Re : Originating Petition No. D2-26-41 OF 2001 ;
Lim Choi Yin v. McLaren Saksama (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd

I have written several letters to the Attorney general, Chief Justice, President & Secretary of Malaysian Bar Council, Sultan of Perak, Minister of Law, and with all copies faxed to Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali and many practicing lawyers, and I CHARGE JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI WITH COMMITTING the following crimes under the Malaysian criminal code. :

(1)Aiding & abetting the respondents, Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, Wong Kem Chen and Kwong Sea Yoon for forgery & Perjury, Perverting the course of justice, obstructing police investigation, aiding & abetting the respondents together with Harris Bin Tun Hussein bin Onn, Lum Siew etc. for obtaining money under false pretences,

(2)I Charge Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali for committing Malfeasance.and abuse of her judicial powers.

I also wish to point out what an arsehole JUDGE that Zainon binti Mohd. Ali is, WHEN SHE STRUCT OFF MY WIFE’S CASE ON THE BASIS OF AN APPLICATION THAT WAS SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT AFFIRMED BY STEPHEN LIM CHENG BAN, WHICH WAS IN FACT AND IN EVERY WAY A LEGAL DEFENSE TO MY WIFE’S CLAIM, as showing no cause of action. The affidavit affirmed that my wife sold her share, and therefore has no legal standing under the Company Act to pursue her petition to wind her company. IS THIS NOT A DEFENSE TO MY WIFE’S APPLICATION TO WIND UP HER COMPANY ?

How is it possible for a judge of the highest court of Malaysia, namely the Malaysian Federal Court to be so ignorant of the Law that she is unable to understand that a striking out of a petition that shows no cause of action means just that and that no defense is necessary TO DISMISS THE PETITION that shows no cause of action; but in my wife’s case Stephen Lim Cheng Ban HAD IN FACT PUT IN A DEFENSE, that my wife had sold her share. TAKE NOTICE THAT RESPONDENT STEPHEN LIM CHENG BAN HAD PUT IN A DEFENSE; SO WHAT IS THE JUSTIFICATION IN LAW FOR JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MHD. ALI TO DENY MY WIFE THE RIGHT TO DEMAND THAT RESPONDENT STEPHEN LIM CHENG BAN PROVE HIS DEFENSE ? This is the crux that is the ground for my charge against Judge Zainon for her abuse of her judicial powers.

This forms the ground for my charge against Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali for abuse of her judicial powers.

Your’s faithfully,


yapchongyee,

COPY : To, President of Court of Appeal, Chief Justice of Malaysia, President & Secretary of Malaysian Bar, Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali, Attorney General, Malaysia; randomly to legal practitioners and Malaysian bloggers.