http://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/186214
KJ John
3:23PM Jan 10, 2012
When it comes to truth matters, judges are trained to focus on the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Therefore I find it amusing, at best, and absurd at worst, that the retired judge from Singapore has denied the truth of the matter about the case of his colleague plagiarising his work.
The core issue is whether or not someone else “plagiarised his work of a written judgment?” The simple and truthful answer is simply ‘yes or no.’ Instead, we find the political doublespeak of “I made no complaint about the matter!”
Usually in the field of knowledge and education, wherein the issues or plagiarism emerge, when it is a clear and personal coinage of an individual, that piece of creative work is considered a ‘work of art,’ and such works of art are clearly and truly the intellectual property of the individuals involved.
Therefore, over the years in human civilisation, the so-called intellectual property law and legal processes are involved to determine and define the piece of work and her origins. It is not rocket science and can easily be verified for the truth of such a matter. Most universities have a simple software for this verification.
Suffice to note, there is also an alternative ‘copyleft movement’ to the ‘copyright’ movement. The ‘copyleft’ became popular with the internet age and constitutes those who object to all items (especially software) being personalised and copyrighted. They may believe that all ‘knowledge’ has a divine source and therefore should be shared freely and easily. We do not pay the Chinese for their gunpowder nor the Indians for their zero.
To quote these ‘copylefters’ from ‘googlespace’: Proprietary software developers use copyright to take away the users’ freedom; we use copyright to guarantee their freedom. That’s why we reverse the name, changing “copyright” into “copyleft.”
Another quote: “The copyleft movement is a diverse and growing alliance of artists, authors, activists, and legal theorists who are building an alternative to the current restrictive regime of intellectual property controls. The movement grows out of concerns over well-funded corporate strategies to privatise and commodify all human knowledge, creativity, and meaning.
“Corporate tactics include legal bullying (filing lawsuits against teenagers sharing movies or songs), neo-colonial bio-prospecting (genetically modifying and patenting seeds and other forms of life), and aggressive trademark and patent acquisition and protection (such as Fox News’ famous lawsuit against Al Franken’s use of the phrase “Fair and Balanced” in his 2003 book).”
Judge wanted to encourage copyleft?
Therefore maybe, just maybe, the Singapore judge is part of this movement, and wanted to encourage ‘copyleft’ as a way of life in Asia. But, even then, maybe he could have simply said, “If mine was a good judgment then so be it, and I am happy to hear that foreign judges are quoting my decisions!”
Karpal Singh is a lawyer by profession, and a politician by purpose of living; but always a truth seeker. I once had the privilege of sharing the next door cabin with him on the KTM in the early 80s. En route from Bukit Mertajam the train broke down somewhere in Perak, midway.
I remember the anger, vehemence, and insistence that his right of travel was now denied and that Karpal was going to sue the KTM for breach of contract, as he has a court case to attend in Kuala Lumpur. I was not only amused but more so, educated about rights and privileges of human beings and citizens from a public service entity. He hired a cab and left for KL, but I got a free ride that day. All I had to do was simply listen to his lectures about truth matters.
The legal profession; which judges belong to as well, is protected and preserved by laws, case-law, precedents, conventions, and protocols. Therefore, when the legal personalities “profess” anything, they must speak the truth about the matter in question.
The word to “profess” means to tell the truth about any matter. It is like a witness statement. But, it also means the whole truth about that matter! Half-truths are never whole truths and any judge worth his salt knows that, I presume.
Please forgive my emotions here as I always wanted to become a lawyer after ‘Perry Mason’ fame, and never made it. And I envy Karpal that as he is almost there. Consequently also, the preamble and personal oath of every witness is “to tell nothing but the truth”, i.e. the whole truth in legal parlance.
Therefore also, having two lawyers who are judges across the small straits that separate us but from originally one nation-state, telling two half-truths about the matter may not be the whole truth. My vote therefore goes to Karpal and his legal colleagues who, I believe, have made a legitimate complaint about the matter within the Bar Council.
It is the Malaysian complaint which matters, and not just whether the Singapore judge feels offended or not, and least of all whether he made a complaint about it.
As a public policy person, I find the timing of both the visit of the Singapore delegation and the date of the court judgment for the Anwar case, and now the press release from the Chief Justice all rather amusing.
Politics are pre-eminent
It all looks like a well-coordinated ‘wayang kulit’ as Mariam Mokhtar so well described, and how our newspaper reports these politics of life but ignores the truth of a matter. There is no politics in Malaysia that does not touch every other area of life. Politics are pre-eminent in Malaysia.
Allow me to quote a personal story to make my case about this issue. When I completed my doctoral thesis, I was blessed by so many people in the journey that I really wanted to repay their kindness by making my published final thesis a ‘copyleft’ matter. And frankly, this was even before I was aware about ‘the copyleft movement.’
I simply did it for the philosophical reason that all truth belongs to the Good Lord and if I can share such truths with others for free, that would make my work more accessible to all and sundry.
I made that request and was duly informed that Microfilms International, the company with rights to all ‘dissertations abstracts’ in all American universities could not agree with my request, and the university advised me that I should agree to their publishing rights if I wanted to graduate.
It was my doctoral thesis but they had more legal jurisdiction about the matter than what I really wanted. So much for liberal human rights. Maybe that explains why the 99 percent are the ones who want to occupy and reclaim all of Wall Street.
May God bless this nation and that 99 percent who choose the next government. Truth matters!
KJ JOHN was in public service for 29 years. The views expressed here are his personal views and not those of any institution he is involved with. Write to him at kjjohn@ohmsi.net with any feedback or views.
No comments:
Post a Comment