by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, in Petaling Jaya on Wednesday, 24th January 1990:
Call on Director of CID, Datuk Zaman Khan, to state whether police have started investigations into the police report Karpal Singh had lodged against the Attorney-General
Two weeks ago, on 12th January 1990, DAP National Deputy Chairman and MP for Jelutong, Karpal Singh, lodged a police report in Penang against the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, for destroying the eleven Vijandran videotapes and four envelopes of 2,000 photographs.
Under section 204 of the Penal Code, it is an offence for anyone to destroy any document which he might be lawfully compelled to produce as evidence before a court which is punishable up to two years jail or fine or both.
The eleven Vijandran videotapes and four envelopes of 2,000 photographs are clearly material which the Attorney-General could be lawfully compelled to produce before a court, whether in criminal prosecutions or civil litigations like defamation proceedings.
I call on the Director of CID, Datuk Zaman Khan, to state whether the police has started investigations into the report lodged by Karpal Singh against Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, and whether after completion of the police investigations, the police is to submit its report to Tan Sri Abu Talib himself, and whether it could be Tan Sri Abu Talib himself who would decide whether the Police should arrest and charge him in court as well.
I have submitted to Parliament for the opening days of Parliament, which will begin its business session on 27th Feb. after the official opening by the Yang di Pertuan Agong on 26th Feb., the following question:
“To ask the Prime Minister what action had been taken with regard to police reports which had been lodged against the Attorney-General for having committed criminal offences in ordering the destruction of eleven videotapes and four envelopes of photographs, and why the Government has not appointed an independent Special Prosecutor to be the final authority to deal with all cases connected with police reports lodged against the Attorney-General.”
The other three questions on the AG/VIJI pornographic videotape scandal which I had submitted to Parliament are:
1. To ask the Prime Minister whether he was consulted before the construction of
the eleven videotapes and four envelopes of 2,000 photographs recovered by the police in connection with the robbery in the house of Y.B. D.P.Vijandran in August 1988; and if not, when he was first informed about the existence of these tapes and photographs;and to state the reasons and the legal basis for the Attorney-General’s decision to destroy the videotapes and photographs, which has now hampered police investigations into various police reports lodged in connection with these videotapes and photographs.
2. To ask the Prime Minister whether the Cabinet had ever discussed the issue of
the destruction of the eleven videotapes and four envelopes of 2,000 photographs recovered by the police in connection with the robbery in the house of YB D.P.Vijandran in August 1988, and why the government had not taken action to remove the Attorney-General because of the gross abuse of prerogative in ordering the destruction of the videotapes and photographs, which had gravely shaken public confidence in the administration of justice, the office of Attorney-General and the very integrity of government itself.
3. To ask the Prime Minister why the Attorney-General had not prosecuted YB
D.P.Vijandran under Section 24(1) of the Films (Censorship) Act 1952 for possession of obscene videotapes and photographs in connection with the eleven videotapes and four envelopes of 2,000 photographs which had been stolen from the house of YB.D.P.Vijandran and which he had acknowledged as owner.