Sunday, 22 August 2010


Letterhead evidence against Liu

PETALING JAYA: Evidence is beginning to surface that Selangor executive councillor Ronnie Liu had issued a letter of support to the very same company that caused his estranged supporter Tee Boon Hock to be sacked from DAP.

Liu is alleged to have personally issued the letter supporting Perkhidmatan AA to the Klang Municipal Council’s environment department director on April 14, 2008 – barely weeks after being made an executive councillor on March 24 of the same year.

Perkhidmatan AA is a company belonging to Tee’s son.

Tee was sacked from the DAP on Aug 1 after he was found guilty of writing a similar letter using Liu’s letterhead to support the same company.

However, Tee is alleging that Liu’s letter was written four months before his (Tee’s) letter, which was dated Aug 12, 2008.

Both letters were contained in a 12-page appeal by Tee to the DAP central executive committee (CEC) against the disciplinary committee’s decision to sack him.

A copy of the appeal was made available to The Star.

In the appeal, Tee, besides making various allegations against Liu, also called for the CEC member to be sacked from the party.

“The person who should be expelled from the party should be Liu and not me,” said Tee, adding that Liu was aware of the support letters he had written, and had “wilfully accused him of acting without his knowledge and authority.”

“This evidence exonerates the fact that I deliberately approved a letter of support to Perkhidmatan AA.

“There was no intention to deceive or cheat,” he said in his appeal.

Tee is asking the CEC to withdraw all charges against him and withdraw the expulsion letter with immediate effect, without any break in his membership.

He also asserted that due process in the disciplinary inquiry was not followed and he was not given a fair and just hearing.

The other grounds of Tee’s appeal are that Liu was not present at the hearing and he could not cross-examine the man who made the accusation against him, two DAP leaders whom he asked to represent him at the hearing were not allowed to do so and the disciplinary committee did not issue any show-cause letter or a charge sheet in writing, spelling out clearly the charges or allegations of misconduct or indiscipline.

Tee claimed that the only notice he received was an SMS from committee chairman Tan Kok Wai on July 29 at 7.03pm, asking him to attend the hearing at 4pm two days later, thus he was not given adequate time to prepare his defence.

According to a party official, the CEC deliberated on Tee’s appeal for four hours on Aug 12 but failed to reach a decision.

The official said five members had criticised Liu but many others kept quiet as they are aware that Liu enjoyed the “protection” of party stalwarts Lim Kit Siang and his son, Guan Eng, who is the secretary-general.

When contacted, Tee declined to talk about the contents of his appeal but said he was dismayed and disappointed over the speed and manner in which the disciplinary committee made its decision in sacking him.

AND TheStar's Joceline Tan says Ronnie Liu had issued support letters to a whole range of businesses, including SLOT MACHINES OPERATORS - GAMBLING OUTLETS!

Had Taiko Ronnie Liu also issued similar support letters for the mushrooming sleazy massage parlours and brothels in Subang Jaya, Shah Alam, Klang, Puchong and Rawang?

So much for a so-called clean, transparent and trustworthy government.

p/s The only thing transparent was what the hundreds of China-dolls were wearing while climbing up the police Black Maria. Also read GAGGED by Karpal Singh.

Site Meter

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

But I like brothels and sleazy massage parlours (and only legal ones not run by the underworld) when I'm in the 'mood'! I'm behind Ronnie Liu on this 'mushrooming;

thing haha !

How about a sealed non-Muslim 'Zona de Tolerancia' in the most international parts of Malaysia at Red Light District equivalents or non-Muslim majority districts so

as to safeguard agains offending religious sensitivities?

We non-Muslims expect space for our own proclivities and are not asking too much for a street or few with legal venues to indulge are we?,_Nuevo_Laredo

Abit more on self determinism and personal choice that law must not take away. A single law can make criminals of many, but these actions are Natural, the laws are not so why do we unlawfully impose to make excuse to arrest and jail our fellow man :