The gov’t should intervene in court case on Samy Vellu, transfer MIC assets to Trust

http://dlvr.it/RKw82C

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2019/12/09/vell-paari-i-filed-suit-so-that-i-can-act-in-the-best-interest-of-my-father

https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2019/12/12/woman-claiming-to-be-samy-vellus-common-law-wife-has-bid-for-maintenance-po/1818538

The son’s Application allegedly may be a ploy to avoid being questioned by the authorities concerned and/or by people going after “you know who”.

The court will explore the possibility that Vell Paari and Father may be feigning collective amnesia to thwart attempts by others to get their hands on assets “unlawfully” held by them.

The court cannot be a party to illegality.

The court invariably takes the side of the person who says, “I am not working and I have no source of income”.

In law, there’s no such thing as a free “eff”. If father and son try to do a number on the 2nd wife, she should sing like a bird to MACC, IRB, Bank Negara and the police (check whether there’s a murder somewhere). Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

The pussy is actually a gold mine if more women go to court.

The court should subpoena Mahathir to get into an exchange with Samy Vellu to help determine whether both men were mentally disordered or otherwise.

The exchange should be witnessed by medical experts subpoenaed by the Court.

Samy and other witnesses subpoenaed should be cross examined on their witness statements.

After the medical experts examine Samy Vellu privately, and separately, the court can rule whether the former MIC Chief was mentally disordered or otherwise.

If the court rules that Samy was not mentally disordered, Vell Paari should be jailed for “perjury” and/or misleading the court and attempting to get it to be party to illegality, trying to enrich himself through the court and allegedly “hijacking” the MIC-linked assets.

The father should also sue the son for defamation. If that doesn’t happen, Samy Vellu should be charged with abettment and criminal conspiracy.

Wife . . .

Civil Law Act 1956, s.7

Since the Legislature has not seen fit to define ‘wife’ in the Civil Law Act 1956 (‘the CLA’) and in the absence of anything to the contrary, the word should be read in its natural sense. Furthermore, as there was nothing in the CLA to provide that ‘wife’ in s.7(2) is confined to a woman who is married in accordance with any Act, it was open to the court to interpret the word as best it may.

Chong Sin Sen v Janaki Chellamuthu [1997] 2 CLJ 699

Civil Law Act 1956, s.7 and Income Tax Act 1967, s.2

Section 2 of the Income Tax Act 1967 defines a wife as a woman who (whether or not she has gone through any religious or other ceremony) is regarded by virtue of any law or custom as the wife of a man and it recognises and gives credence to a customary wife. The Johor State Government had recognised the plaintiff as wife of the deceased and had transferred the deceased’s low cost house into her name.

Tan Sai Hong v. Joremi Kimin & Anor [1997] 5 CLJ 614

Marriage . . .

Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, s.34

Pursuant to s.34 of the Act, the plaintiff did not even have to show that there was a marriage according to Chinese customary rites so long as there was a marriage. Section 34 of the Act refers to the existence of ‘any’ marriage and thus does not define the term ‘marriage’. Thus, the term ‘marriage’ therein should be given its ordinary everyday meaning. The fact that the plaintiff and the deceased had sent wedding invitation cards to the relatives and friends inviting them to witness the wedding and also attend a ‘tea-drinking’ ceremony as well as a wedding dinner showed that an act of marriage had taken place on 19 November 1995.

Leong Wee Shing v. Chai Siew Yin [2000] 1 CLJ 439

Spouse . . .

Interstate Succession Act 81 of 1987 (South Africa), s.1(4)(f)

In the present case, to read the word ‘spouse’ so as to include multiple spouses would be a significant departure from the ordinary, commonly understood meaning of the word, as it is used in the Act. Therefore, the word ‘spouse’ as it is used in the Act is not capable of being understood to include more than one partner to a marriage. In consequence, we must read in words to cure the defects.

As the text stands now, the word ‘spouse’ is not reasonably capable of being understood to include more than one spouse in the context of a polygynous marriage. The omission of the words ‘or spouses’ is therefore inconsistent with the Constitution and those words thus need to be added to the Act so as to cure the defect. Accordingly, I would add the words ‘or spouses’ after each use of the word ‘spouse’ in the Act.

Fatima Gabie Hashim v. Johan Hermanus Jacobs No & Ors [2011] 1 CLJ (Sya) 1

Spouse . . .

Distribution Act 1958, s.6(1)(b)

The plaintiff would have to show that she and the deceased were married under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 Act (‘Act’) if she wanted to be recognised as the spouse of the deceased. However, she was unable to show that she had become the deceased’s spouse pursuant to any of the applicable provisions of the Act. Ergo, she could not be a spouse of the deceased within the meaning of the Distribution Act 1958 for the simple reason that it was only the Act which could have conferred the status of the spouse of the deceased on her and there had been no compliance with the provisions of the Act by the Plaintiff and the deceased for that status to have been conferred on her.

Chia Siew Li v. Liew Khey Cheong & Anor [2010] 4 CLJ 36

Not willing to let go . . .

There are parallels between Mahathir and Samy Vellu. Waytha Moorthy will soon be there.

It’s not entirely clear whether former MIC President Samy Vellu was under great stress and pressure, perhaps financially, and traumatised by having to leave the political scene after over three decades as party chief.

Samy should have known when to let go but unfortunately, like Mahathir, he was possessive, belabouring under a strong sense of proprietorship. It’s not his grandfather’s property.

Ironically, he used to accuse his critics of being greedy, jealous, and behaving as if it was their grandfather’s property.

This is carrying certainty in the comfort zone to the extreme for no rhyme or reason.

It’s a fact that We are not the gross body gathered from the sun through Mother Nature on Mother Earth.

The gross body, being differentiated in space and time, seeks certainty during its mortal life. This includes being possessive, greedy, materialistic and harbouring a strong sense of proprietorship.

We, freed from the gross body when it runs out of time, is undifferentiated, not bound by space and time, and dissipates into the great nothingness in the hereafter i.e. if there’s such a thing. No one has come back from the hereafter to tell us.

If there was something before the here and now, there may be a hereafter.

We can cross the bridge when we come to it.

There’s no reason to listen to conmen like Zakir Naik just because we don’t know.

MIC-linked assets . . .

The gov’t should intervene in the court case on Samy so that “MIC-linked assets can be transferred to a Trust”.

MIC-linked assets, it’s believed, are controlled by Samy. I advised him to do that when he agreed that I could write his exclusive retirement story in malaysiakini. Like Mahathir, he said a long goodbye.

Samy claimed the MIC-linked assets didn’t belong to the party.

Next day, the Star quoted Samy as denying my story.

Samy assured he had nothing to do with the Star story. He complained that a particular reporter in Star had the habit of cooking up quotes and attributing them to him. I rang Star and fired the Editor over the fake report.

Samy’s press secretary rang malaysiakini and tried to get my story withdrawn. Malaysiakini said they couldn’t do that but would be willing to run a correction.

They wanted to know from Samy whether there were any errors in the story. Samy said there were none but he wanted it withdrawn. Malaysiakini refused to do it.

Then, Samy asked me to withdraw the story. I said malaysiakini would not do that. “You are the author,” he said. “You do it.”

Political career . . .

He complained he received numerous abusive calls over the MIC-linked assets. “Thank you Joe. You have killed my political career,” said Samy before signing off.

I was taken aback when Samy accused me of killing his political career.

True, I did suggest that he resign as MIC president. That was only after he asked me whether he should resign.

Enough is enough!

The thought of killing his political career never crossed my mind. I thought that it was best that he focus on running the MIC-linked assets since he could do a better job.

I ran into Samy at the Gardens at Mid Valley last year after GE14. He had lost some weight but otherwise appeared healthy and in good spirits. He was subdued.

MIC President G. Palanivel may have been thrown out of the party when he demanded the MIC-linked assets be given back to the party.

Looking back . . .

Samy stands out for a number of reasons viz. great energy, a positive mindset, honesty, punctuality and an elephant’s memory.

He was unusual for a Tamil in Malaya. He was every bit Malayalee like Mahathir except that he looked Tamil.

Samy started working life as an office boy at the KL Municipal Council. He disclosed that a British officer suggested that he attend night classes in architectural draftsmanship.

Eventually, he qualified in London as an Architect.

Read further . . .

https://www.thomasphilip.com.my/articles/mental-health-act-2001-n-safeguarding-the-welfare-of-the-mentally-disordered/

Mental Health Act 2001, s.51

Section 51 of the Act defines ‘mentally disordered person’ as follows:

‘Mentally disordered person’ means any person found by due course of law to be mentally disordered and incapable of managing himself and his affairs.

In the context of the present case, the procedures laid down in Part X which includes ss.51 to 58 of the Act, is the due course of law that has to be complied with before a person can be found to be a mentally disordered person. The court has to make a finding that the person is mentally disordered and incapable of managing himself and his affairs before it can exercise its discretion under s.58 to appoint a committee or committees, for the person and his estate.

Aminah Ahmad v. Ali Mokhtar Hj Abdul Rahman [2015] 2 CLJ 940

https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=crmas&p=Samy+Vellu+by+Joe+Fernandez+in+malaysiakini

https://m.malaysiakini.com/news/113640

https://fernzthegreat.wordpress.com/2019/12/04/indians-for-some-strange-reason-insist-on-being-stupid-waytha-moorthy-is-an-example/

Waytha Moorthy is also going around trying to increase the level of stupidity among Indians.

Author: fernzthegreat

Joe Fernandez holds a honours degree in management, majoring in economics, and has opted from academia in law to being a jurist. He was trained professionally on the job as a journalist. He's a longtime Borneo watcher, keen on the history and legal aspects of Malaya's presence in Sabah and Sarawak. He teaches the English language privately and has emerged as a subject matter expert in public examination techniques.

%d bloggers like this: