🔊 Listen to this

Lies and falsehoods exposed, all thanks to the long-awaited good news; The KL High Court declared that the 13 days out of my 26-days detention by Immigration Department of Malaysia was illegal, unlawful and unconstitutional.

Finally, the Malaysian High Court’s declaration on 4.5.2021 has vindicated me. The high court judge, NBB had declared in her written judgment for Saman Pemula No: WA-24-5-01/2020 that the Immigration Department of Malaysia had infringed Article 5(4) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. In simple language it means that those involved in the act are lawless and corrupt.

The trial before the high court judge, NBB, has conclusively proven the truth of whether the account given by the Immigration Department of Malaysia or my account is the truthful one. I am indeed grateful to the high court for this judgment that is purely based on the evidence presented before Judge NBB. The evidence is a page 3 from a set of documents that consisted of 3 pages that was provided by the Immigration Department of Malaysia in an earlier high court hearing, Permohonan Jenayah No: WA-44-178-07/2019.

This is in spite of the immigration officer, MHBK‘s attempt to present a “manufactured” re-typed copy as exhibit “MHK-1” of the original remand order as his evidence.

The judge, NBB makes it very clear in her written judgment regarding the two different remand orders as follows: “It is of the considered view that the Plaintiff’s deposition that he was not produced before any magistrate on 12.3.2018 is substantiated by the fact that there are two remand orders which have not been explained off by the Defendant.”

The role of a magistrate as another perverse enablers to pervert justice

As mentioned earlier above, the immigration officer, MHBK presented a “manufactured” re-typed remand order as evidence. This piece of re-typed remand order was arranged/requested from another magistrate, MASBMA, a different magistrate from the magistrate who signed off the original official remand order. Furthermore, this “manufactured” re-typed remand order do not bear the magistrate MASBMA‘s signature or any signature.

Looking at the document provided by a different magistrate (to the magistrate who issued the original remand order) was one of her biggest challenges and stumbling block to this high court judge, NBB. It is probably with disbelief from Judge NBB that she is viewing a piece of evidence that bears no signature of a court official or a magistrate. Without the magistrate’s signature there is no authentication of the “manufactured” remand order to be a truthful and reliable evidence.

It is quite unbelievable for Malaysia judicial system that the high court judge has to rules that the evidence or exhibit “MHK-1” provided by the immigration officer, MHBK as “unexplained”. Such a judge’s ruling means that the judge view this evidence that is coming from a high-level government official is surprising a piece of hogwash evidence. The evidence is not authentic, “manufactured”, is unreliable and fake as evidence to counter the original remand order. It is expected of officer, MHBK to exhibit a clear copy of the same exhibit “W-2” as submitted by me in order to debunk my evidence and the contents in the original remand order.

This is the extent that perverse enablers like magistrate, MASBMA are in cahoots with the Immigration Department of Malaysia officers, is willing to go to great length to perpetuate lies and falsehoods against a foreigner and pervert justice.

What was the magistrate’s action in lies and falsehoods?

In an earlier court affidavit filed by Defendant, another immigration officer, HBB submitted a so-called “Proceedings Note” dated 12.3.2018 document as her exhibit, “HB-1”. This exhibit is purportedly to support her allegation, i.e. I was produced before the magistrate on 12.3.2018 for remand order according to her affidavit (FAIO) dated 26.8.2019.

This document has been machine-stamped during transmission to show that document consisted of a set of 3 pages. However, she “tampered” with the evidence by removing page 3 of 3 and only put page 1 of 3 and page 2 of 3 in her exhibit, “HB-1”.

However, by the grace of God, a hard copy of the full 3-pages document was given out during the high court hearing and a copy handed to my Malaysian lawyer, AK. So Pg 3 of 3 miraculously landed in my possession through my lawyer, AK.

It must be emphasized that this exhibit-document originated from the Immigration Department of Malaysia’s file. As such being the case, their usual “vehemently denying everything that I had alleged” cannot be applied here because it is their own exhibit-document. There is no escape opening because the exhibit-document is Immigration Department of Malaysia’s own document. It was supposed to be placed in exhibit “HB-1” in immigration officer HBB‘s affidavit (FAIO) submitted for an earlier high court ‘Application for Revision’, Permohonan Jenayah No WA-44-178-07/2019.

Officials in cahoots with one another to come up with a “Nota Prosiding”, a “manufactured” re-typed remand order

In order to refute this exhibit “W-2”, a page 3 of 3 of original remand order in my affidavit (AIS); the Legal Adviser, FSBMF from Immigration Department of Malaysia wrote an email to a different magistrate, MASBMA on the 4.5.2020. In this letter, he “put in an official request” to this magistrate, MASBMA for a copy of “Proceedings Note”. It is unexplainable that FSBMF did not put in his request to the magistrate, ABB who had signed off on the original remand order. Naturally, one can expect that magistrate, ABB would most gladly pull his original remand order from his record to send to FSBMF since it is to be used in a high court case. But magistrate ABB was not approached at all which already is a giveaway that something fishy is in the works here.

So, magistrate MASBMA on 12.5.2020 “helpfully replied and attached a “manufactured” re-typed page 3 of 3”, calling it a “Nota Prosiding” as it syncs with the “Nota Prosiding” in FSBMF‘s email. And this “manufactured” re-typed page 3 of 3″ now with a new name, “Nota Prosiding” defined by FSBMF was given to immigration officer, MHBK to use as MHBK‘s “Nota Prosiding” exhibit, “MHK-1” to refute the exhibit, “W-2” which is the remand order that is part of the set of “Note of Proceeding”.

A “manufactured” document against an original document

Unless people are really ignorant or uneducated, a normal person would be able to tell whether a document is authentic or “manufactured”.

In this scenario, I have exhibited a document that was supplied by Immigration Department of Malaysia. It must be reiterated that this evidence does not originate from me but was provided by Immigration Department of Malaysia officers.

In order to verify the authenticity of this remand order and its contents, a clear copy of an original remand order, requested from the same magistrate office’s filing system or the archives and presented before the court and the judge for inspection.

Instead of presenting a clear copy, MHBK presented a re-typed unsigned copy. i.e a “manufactured” copy to the court to present before Judge NBB. This re-typed unsigned copy and the original had more than 25 errors and differences sighted.

Unashamedly, it was exhibited as authentic to the court and to the judge, NBB. My Malaysian lawyer, AK laid both remand orders side by side and meticulously listed all the discrepancies, errors and differences between the two remand orders to present to Judge NBB and the high court.

This presentation and Lawyer AK‘s final submission convinced the high court judge, NBB to issue her ruling as follows: “It is of the considered view that the Plaintiff’s deposition that he was not produced before any magistrate on 12.3.2018 is substantiated by the fact that there are two remand orders which have not been explained off by the Defendant”.

Judge NBB rejected the Immigration Department of Malaysia’s account and the final submission of the Defendant’s Federal Counsel, MSBMA.

Difference in Court language and Engineering language

Through the coaching from the language and terms used by my Malaysian lawyer, AK on all my affidavits filed, I have learnt that there is a difference in terms to be used in order to be politically correct with the judicial system.

As an example, the affidavit filed has to use the court-sanctioned term “tampered” evidence. Whereas in my Engineering-background, the term we use “manufactured”/”fabricated” or “falsified” a fake document if writing an Engineering report to describe such document.

Engineer can reverse engineered a component and using the reverse-engineered data to manufacture copies of the original component. However, we can never get the same characteristics of the original component. One of the intrinsic characteristics that can never be the same is the material characteristics which come certified through a material certificate issued by the mill. The other features can be manipulated and altered to suit whatever the user’s requirements are.

So, in this case, the document purportedly is showing a tick to indicated “tidak” or “No” option is selected. However, it has now been changed to a strikeout on “tidak” to indicate the opposite of the original. This is deliberately to deceive by altering from a tick to a strikeout.

“Manufactured” copy of an original is to perpetuate their lies and falsehoods. It shows the extent that those without integrity were willing to go to in order to tip the scale of justice.

The lies and falsehoods before this stage

I have to endure for more than three years from April 2018 before I could be vindicated by the truth of the matter finally.

I was disappointed when the ‘Application for Revision’ case closed with the judge, MNBHG‘s dismissal of my suit citing without merit in the earlier court case. That ruling came in December 2019 and following after was the process of my appeal against judge, MNBHG‘s dismissal. Worse was the fact that this MNBHG was lied to and been successfully deceived by these two immigration officers, alleging in their affidavits that I was produced before a magistrate on 12.3.2018.

Little did I know that God was working through the long-drawn process. This process is to show more of what these immigration officers, the federal counsel, MSBMA and the court deputy registrar, FSBSA were in cahoots, as well as capable of perpetuating lies and falsehoods.

One can now see how immigration officers can abuse their power with the help of perverse enablers to pervert justice as elaborated above and continue to commit illegal and unlawful acts.

Other instances of lies and falsehoods

And it is not just with the help of perverse enablers as mentioned above to pervert justice, but we will show another instance of lies and falsehoods perpetuated against me during proceedings.

The second lie and falsehood – federal counsel, MSBMA and court deputy registrar, FSBSA allows an out-of-time submission.

In order to put the story into perspective, I have listed important key dates and related events

21.1.2020 – Based on the hard copy evidence of the magistrate remand order, we start an Originating Summon (OS) action against Immigration Department of Malaysia and file a Plaintiff’s affidavit-in-support (P-AIS).

20.2.2020 – This is the date of the deadline for submission of Defendant’s affidavit-in-reply (P-AIR). However, the Defendant failed to submit his D-AIR without justification.

1.3.2020 (Sunday) – This is the day that the Malaysia 8th Prime Minister took office.

18.3.2020 (Wednesday) – This is the day of the Malaysia national lockdown (MCO) due to Covid-19.

14.5.2020 (Thursday) – This is the day when the Defendant filed his affidavit-in-reply (D-AIR). This 14.5.2020 was after the deadline (20.2.2020), meaning the D-AIR was filed and served out of time.

Court officers perpetuating lies and falsehoods

From the above timeline showing the dates and when each event occurred, we can see clearly that the federal counsel, MSBMA and the court deputy registrar, FSBSA were perpetuating lies and falsehoods to pervert justice. We had called out such lies and falsehoods in my Plaintiff’s affidavit-in-reply (P-AIR) to the Defendant’s affidavit-in-reply (D-AIR) as shown:

The Defendant had disregarded the deadline and failed to submit his D-AIR to the court before this deadline.

However, FSBSA and MSBMA had misused their official appointment and colluded to push forth lies and falsehoods that the MCO lockdown, that started on 18.3.2020, caused him to miss the deadline to submit the D-AIR. This is a hogwash.

All of the above happened during the time of Saman Pemula No: WA-24-5-01/2020.

The 3rd of lies and falsehoods – immigration depot commandant submitted “tampered” exhibit.

The below-mentioned happened during the time of Permohonan Jenayah No: WA-44-178-07/2019

5.8.2019 (Monday) – On this day, senior immigration officer, MHBK filed his affidavit-in-opposition (AIO). In my affidavit-in-support (AIS). he was challenged to answer my allegation of unlawful detention as per Immigration Act Section 51(5)(b) – to produce me before a magistrate for a remand order within 14-days in my affidavit. To that allegation, he simply made the allegation in para 9 and para 10 that my detention was in accordance with the Act’s requirement and that he, as an investigating officer, had ensured that it was being done according to procedure. However, soon he realized that his allegation did not have any supporting evidence and so another immigration colleague came along to submit a further-affidavit-in-opposition (FAIO) to help him out.

26.8.2019 (Monday) – On this day, immigration officer, Ms HBB jumped in to support MHBK, submitted a further-affidavit-in-opposition (FAIO). This FAIO is in reply to my affidavit-in-support (AIS).

The English translation of para 17 of FAIO: “17. I hereby deny paragraph 40 of the applicant’s support affidavit. The applicant was brought before the magistrate for further detention under section 51 (5) (b) of the Immigration Act 1959/63 from 13.3.2018 and allowed until 26.3.2018. On 26.3.2018, the applicant was arraigned in court. A copy of the order by the magistrate is presented and marked as “HB-1″.”

English translation to the above:

This exhibit “HB-1” was a machine-transmitted document received by immigration officer, HBB. As for machine-transmitted document, there will be information of the sender and receiver telephone number, document ID#, date and time stamp and P. 001/003 denoting page 1 of 3 to tells you that there is 3 pages that you should receive for this transmission.

Exhibit “HB-1” was “tampered” with and page 3 deliberately removed from exhibit. This aims to deceive the court concerning the truth about the magistrate remand order, i.e. I was never produced before the magistrate on 12.3.2018.

With the knowledge that she is hiding this page 3 of 3 means immigration officer, HBB has no qualms to perpetuate lies and falsehoods.

The 4th of lies and falsehoods in judge’s written judgement

From the above-mentioned, we have seen how MHBK had averred in para 9 and para 10 of his affidavit (AIO) that he has detained me in accordance with section 51(5)(b) of the Immigration Act.

This is eventually proven to be a lie which he succeeded to deceive the court and the judge MNBMG for Permohonan Jenayah No: WA-44-178-07/2019.

MHBK used an accomplice, immigration officer, Ms HBB to help him to lie and deceive the court and judge MNBMG. Ms HBB had averred that I was produced before a magistrate within 14 days, according to the requirements of section 51(5)(b) for a remand order. This remand order is for my detention from 13.3.2018 to 26.3.2018 in para 16 and para 17 of her affidavit (FAIO). She even submitted an exhibit “HB-1” to support her allegation.

So, because of two false witnesses, the high court judge, MNBMG believed in both their allegations and together with the “tampered” exhibit “HB-1”, MNBMG issued two paragraphs in his written judgment that contained these lies and falsehoods.

These two paragraphs were paragraph 38: “This is not just the absence of any issues raised to the depot authorities and the investigation officer, but also to the magistrate during remand proceeding.” And paragraph 55: “The applicant in this case before me not only did not raise complaints whilst in remand with the depot authorities, or to the investigating officer, or to the magistrate who had allowed remand, …)

The 5th of lies and falsehoods – “kind-hearted”, “religious” immigration officer’s “offer to help”

During my illegal and unlawful detention straight up for 26 days, I had no idea what was happening outside of the Pekan Nenas Immigration Detention Depot.

Neither do my family and friends outside have any idea what was happening to me inside this horrible inhumane immigration detention depot throughout my detention.

A Malaysian acquaintance, Ps JM then went to Setia Tropika Immigration HQ to find out more about what is happening. Ps JM went to see immigration officer, PS to provide his testimony about me.

An excerpt taken from the record in a daily log of events about this acquaintance, Ps JM who went to see the immigration officer, PS as below. Is this immigration officer PS full of lies and falsehoods, given what has been recorded in the diary log of events?

This acquaintance, PS JM came to my family with an “offer to help” message from immigration after Ps JM had met PS. Earlier on 6.3.2018, Immigration officer had me gave my wife his HP number to call in at 6.28 pm. I find this action suspicious in that he is implicitly opening a private communication channel with my family.

The message is a backdoor “offer to help” monetary bribes instead of paying lawyers to deal with Immigration Department of Malaysia officers. However, my family rejected such kind of backdoor deal after having a crisis meeting to discuss about this backdoor “help”.

We leave it for others to make their own conclusion of what this backdoor “offer to help” message is all about and what immigration officer, PS was trying to do.

6th lies and falsehoods with “falsified” Orders

There is a 2nd part illegal detention from 27.3.2018 to 3.4.2018 that happened after the 1st part illegal detention from 13.3.2018 to 26.3.2018. The Immigration Department of Malaysia would have never thought that I would come after their immigration officers with another legal challenge, Saman Pemula No: WA-24-16-04/2022 concerning the 2nd part illegal detention. The details on this legal challenge are documented on this post, “Presenting “manufactured” evidence to challenge facts.”

So, in the course of this legal challenge, starting from 27.1.2022 to the hearing on 12.9.2022, there are many twists and turns throughout the court process. One can tell that the Immigration Department of Malaysia was reeling from their shock of a second illegal detention and is now fighting tooth and nails to knock off this legal challenge. There is their first standard move to have the court strike out this suit and it became a “stillborn”. This move failed and the Immigration Department of Malaysia has to face off with me in the high court on my allegation and my evidence that were proffered against them. It was all real and solid evidence that they had not imagined that someone would be keeping all these documents.

Finally, the long-awaited day for me came for them to respond with their affidavit in reply (AIR). Imagine the shock I gotten when my Malaysian lawyer, AK sent me the affidavit (D-AIR1) submitted by a senior immigration officer, NBJ. There was an exhibit, “NJ-1” that was claimed to be an Order of Removal and an Order for Detention. When and where in the world was I given these two orders which I have never seen but now is in immigration officer, NBJ‘s affidavit (D-AIR1) and a short paragraph to say that I was served these two orders and I have thumbprint to show acknowledgement and acceptance. For a fact, I sign all my documents and not one was thumbprint as I am an educated man.

That was truly a preposterous lie and falsehood. These immigration officers will find ways and tricks to wriggle out from any real knotty situations.

During my days of detention, I have heard many tales of “falsified” orders from fellow detainees that immigration officer can turn one legal status from being an illegal migrant worker to a legal migrant worker and vice versa by means of a backdoor deal. In the past, I can only say that it is only hearsay, now these hearsays will no longer be unbelievable after having seen these “specific purpose customized” order documents as court exhibits.

The biggest of the lies and falsehoods – This immigration officer who trespassed illegally on my property

This immigration officer, MZ believed that he can creates the biggest lies and falsehoods of them all.

When he trespassed illegally on my property to cohabit with his married girlfriend JS, I made a police report against him.

During my detention, MZ who works in Pekan Nenas Detention Depot was regularly harassing me. He even made an attempt to assault me by using a proxy, an immigration guard.

Through immigration officer, MZ, has earned the credit of having created the biggest lies and falsehoods collection to his ignominious and infamous name.

The lesson from all these is:

Don’t play Russian roulette with a foreigner’s life according to your whims and fancies. If you do so, even you sent in an army to fight an ordinary man like me, you are a loser because you cannot win the truth. The joke is on the Immigration Department of Malaysia and what a shameful bunch of losers.