May I asked you where you got all those information for your articles, the publication of which prompt Shell to take legal actions against me, in breach of my human rights and freedom?
Email received from Shell whistleblower Dr John Huong on 21 April 2008. We have provided hyperlinks to the articles he itemized.
Dear Mr. Donovans,
A few months ago, you wrote articles concerning the Malaysian judiciary System. Can you confirm and tell me where the following articles were posted and the author and/or authors of those articles itemized from 1-3 below.
Since posting those articles, were there any changes made to the document since then?
This is urgent because my lawyer will be going to the court tomorrow and I would like him to bring these information to the judge. This is because the affirmed affidavit by one Shell’s Thuvakumar had included your article in his affidavit as a basis to giving me more injunctions.
May I asked you where you got all those information for your articles, the publication of which prompt Shell to take legal actions against me, in breach of my human rights and freedom? I believe removing part of the documents is a criminal act of tampering a document which subsequently was affirmed before the Commissioner of Oath and the Court must know this.
Dr. John Huong
EXTRACTS FROM RELATED LETTER FROM DR HUONG DATED 28 APRIL ADDRESSED TO HIS LAWYER, TREVOR GEORGE DE SILVA
I am very disappointed with Shell in the person of Mr. Thuvakumar for preferring to torture me and continue to do so. In his affidavit affirmed on 6.11.2007 before the Commissioner of Oath, Mr. Thuvakumar and the Shell Counsel knew very well that I was not the author of the published document containing two glaring themes the Corruption crisis of the Malaysian Judiciary and the unlawful deduction from the Employees Provident Fund from ex-Shell employees.
4. The document was published in UK by Mr. Alfred and John Donovan (father and son) and was downloaded from their website, www.royaldutchshellplc.com which was operated from a server located in New York, USA. I have no access to upload any publication and including the attached document found in Mr. Thuvakumars affidavit.
Shell should take issue with Mr. Alfred and John Donovan in the right jurisdiction. The Donovans have informed the Malaysian lawyers concerned and the Malaysian High Court where Shell has sued the wrong person, in the wrong place and for wrong reasons. These gentlemen have repeatedly invited Shell to seek legal redress if Shell thinks that her good reputation was injured and defamed.
In addition, such acts of injustice and including perjury, missing medical reports, tampering of records, certification of actual records, making up false tabulations, etc were also used by Thuvakumar, his counsels and witnesses in my Industrial Court Case and I will be pointing this out to the judge when the case which was scheduled for hearing on the 28th April 2008 is now deferred to 7th May for a mention; to set a new trial date. Mr. Sim, the Shell counsel in my Industrial court case should know better since he is the President for the Sarawak Bar Association. He ought to know better what is ethical and just of a reasonable man in a legal profession. As was replied to the Statement of claims in the defamation lawsuit, the information obtained in the Industrial Court case will be inclusive as stated in the response.
RELATED EMAIL THAT DR HUONG RECEIVED FROM HIS LAWYER on 28 APRIL 2008
Dear Dr. Huong
I trust all is well with you.
I am glad to inform that the Court agreed with our submission and expunged Shells last affidavit (i.e the one exhibiting the Donovans website write-up on the Msian Judiciary).
The Judge has now fixed both injunction matters for disposal on August 27, 2008, with a mention first on August 1, 2008.
Meanwhile, we are also getting case management directions for the setting down of the matter for trial. I will contact you in this regard once the order has been made so that we can make arrangements for the collation of all documents you wish to adduce at the trial.
Trevor George De Silva
Suite 2.07-2.10, 2nd Floor, Wisma Mirama
Jalan Wisma Putra, 50460 Kuala Lumpur
Lee Ong & Kandiah Advocates & Solicitors
NEITHER CASE GOT TO TRIAL. SHELL SETTLED BOTH ACTIONS OUT OF COURT. TOO MUCH “INTERNAL LAUNDRY” TO BE AIRED IN OPEN COURT, INCLUDING THE CRIMINAL TAMPERING OF EVIDENCE BY SHELL LAWYERS, E.G. HIDING IMPORTANT INFORMATION FROM THE JUDGE BY REMOVING IT FROM DOCUMENTS PUT BEFORE HIM.