Royal Dutch Shell Plc  .com Rotating Header Image

Shell whistleblower Dr Huong accuses Shell of psychological torture

I am very disappointed with Shell in the person of Mr. Thuvakumar for the psychological torture inflicted on me for almost four years.  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 publications – the “Corruption crisis of the Malaysian Judiciary” and the “unlawful deduction” from the Employee’s Provident Fund from ex-Shell employees. He used the same tactics used from the outset of the litigation blaming me for internet publication by the Donovan’s over which I have no influence.

Dr John Huong

Thavakumar Kandiahpillai, General Counsel, Shell Group of Companies, Malaysia.

Thavakumar obtained his LLB (Honours) from University of London in 1989 and was admitted to the English Bar at Middle Temple in 1990. He then went on to obtain his LLM from University Of London in 1991 and was admitted to the Malaysian Bar in 1992. He also became a member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators in 1992. Thavakumar practised in Kuala Lumpur as an Advocate & Solicitor becoming a partner in 1998. In his practice, he was actively involved in litigation, during which time he appeared in several landmark cases, and also in domestic and offshore banking, corporate and commercial work. Thavakumar joined Shell Malaysia in KL in 2000 as Senior Counsel, Corporate & Company Secretarial. In 2001, he then became the Head of Legal at Shell Malaysia Exploration & Production, based in Miri, Sarawak. He then moved to back to KL taking charge of the Downstream, GP, and Shared Services legal advisory team. Thavakumar was appointed General Counsel in August 2006.

Article by John Donovan

The email attachment printed below from Shell Malaysia whistleblower Dr John Huong to his lawyer, Trevor George De Silva, accuses Shell of psychological torture in the defamation action brought against him by EIGHT Royal Dutch Shell companies. Shell had repeatedly attempted to have Dr Huong imprisoned for alleged contempt of court on grounds they knew to be false. Dr Huong also points out that evidence was falsified by Shell lawyers who gave perjured testimony to the Judge.

EMAIL FROM DR JOHN HUONG TO HIS LAWYER TREVOR GEORGE DE SILVA

29th April 2008

Miri, Sarawak, East Malaysia.

Dear Mr. Trevor,

Good morning.

I have not heard from you since 11th March 2008 on further development in my case, thus my email on 24th April 2008 for which I received your reply yesterday, 28th April 2008.

Could you kindly enlighten me about some details not mentioned in your email. Based on the last information available, the hearing was supposed to take place on 22 April 2008.  Did the hearing take place that day? Did you go personally go to the Court to represent me?  How long was the hearing? Assuming there is no transcript, in general terms what was stated in the exchanges that took place between the people present? Where is the written response Shell Counsel was instructed by the judge at the last hearing to produce for this hearing?  What was the outcome with respect to the application for extension of the ex-parte injunction which you told me last time for which the Court has no record?  What is the status of the committal injunction? Please let me know every important detail that transpired during the hearing before the Judge.

I am very disappointed with Shell in the person of Mr. Thuvakumar for the psychological torture inflicted on me for almost four years.  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 publications – the “Corruption crisis of the Malaysian Judiciary” and the “unlawful deduction” from the Employee’s Provident Fund from ex-Shell employees. He used the same tactics used from the outset of the litigation blaming me for internet publication by the Donovan’s over which I have no influence.

I decided on 21st April 2008 that I should write to publisher of the articles mentioned above.  I attached herewith, the email I sent. Mr. John Donovan has kindly responded to confirm who did author the relevant articles.  If you have any opportunities, please extend that information to the attention of the Judge.

This letter to you sets out by preliminary thoughts, which came to mind as a result of your email and developments in my Industrial Court case against Shell. I will confer with my extended family and in due course, after I have received the additional information requested herein, will write again setting out important matters which I would like you to bring to the attention of the Judge and relevant parties.

Is it proper to go ahead with the defamation case bearing in mind the response to the Statement of Case had said that the findings in the Industrial Court case will have to be included?  Bear in mind that the Industrial case went to court much earlier than the defamation case.  Can you advise on this matter?

1. Shell’s affidavit was filed close to the hearing dates to which we have limited time to study and respond accordingly.

2. The affidavit was not filed with the High Court and therefore not given the Court reference number to be quoted in all future communication. This is clearly an abuse of the legal process and I believe previous handing of my Court documents was the same and there was a mess concerning those documents.

3. How can I have the confidence to expect the Judge to follow my case, given the huge time gap in between each hearing, poor cause paper documentation, changing of judges, etc.  The judges for both my defamation and the Industrial cases are now changed.

4. The attachment to the affirmed affidavit before the Commissioner of Oath was made in bad faith. Why is that so?

5. The document was published in the 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 the USA.  I have no access to upload ANY publication, including the articles cited in Mr. Thuvakumar’s affidavit.

Shell should take issue with Mr. Alfred and John Donovan in the right jurisdiction.  The Donovan’s have informed the Malaysian lawyers concerned and the Malaysian High Court that Shell sued the wrong person, in the wrong place and for the wrong reasons.  These gentlemen have repeatedly invited Shell to seek legal redress if Shell thinks that her good reputation was injured and defamed. These invitations were made to Shell many times in the past and in the most current email dated 21st April 2008 (published on the internet) which said.

“If Shell takes issue with anything stated in the relevant articles they should take action against the authors and publishers as admitted in this email, namely Alfred Donovan and John Donovan in respect of the first article and John Donovan (me) in regards to the other two”

www.royaldutchshellplc.com
<http://www.royaldutchshellplc.com> is an internet gripe website described by the Financial Times as “anti-Shell”. The Daily Mail said Shell is “rattled” and has been put on the “back foot” by the website. Reuters said that it is an “unofficial” company website with the most up to date information about Shell. Fortune Magazine has recommended two websites – Shell portal site www.shell.com <http://www.shell.com/>  and royaldutchshellplc.com for information about Shell. See The Internet humiliation of Royal Dutch Shell Plc <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/10/22/the-internet-humiliation-of-royal-dutch-shell-plc/> and  Free Research on Royal Dutch Shell Plc (over 19,000 articles) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/02/16/free-research-on-royal-dutch-shell-plc-over-19000-articles/> : and Nikkei BP (Japan): Gripe sites are becoming more powerful <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/11/13/nikkei-bp-japan-gripe-sites-are-becoming-more-powerful/> :

Testimonies concerning Shell reserve fraud are also found at the gripe site. See Royal Dutch Shell dirty washing hung out to dry here every day… <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/11/16/royal-dutch-shell-dirty-washing-hung-out-to-dry-here-every-day/> :and  Link to Shell Fraud Litigation Webpage updated daily  <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/11/12/the-link-to-the-shell-reserves-litigation-webpage-updated-daily/>  Many horrendous stories like Shell’s “Touch Fuck All” culture resulting in the death of Shell workers in Brent Bravo and a dossier of “Controversies surrounding the Royal Dutch Shell“ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Royal_Dutch_Shell> found in Wikipedia. No one else in the world was sued for defamation other than the Shell Group of Companies making allegations against me and taking out litigation against me in the Malaysian Jurisdiction.

5. Why did the Malaysian Judiciary allow the Shell Group of Companies to prefer placing the burden of Shell’s pathetic reputation on me by resorting to abuse “the legal process to prejudice the Court’s mind”? What has the 399 retirement fund case got to do with me? I am not even a member in the lawsuit. However, I did hear, the then ex-chairman, Mr. Jon Chadwick promising employees in the “Mulu Hall” forum, that should the “399” win their case, the application of the equitable outcome will be applicable to the rest of the employees which naturally includes me.

6. Mr. Thuvakumar, together with the Shell Counsel has attached a document to the affirmed affidavit deliberately removing name of the authors in the said document.  All other information and including the URLs were clearly shown.

7. Why were name of the authors deliberately removed from the article “Corruption Crisis in Malaysian Judiciary Impacts on Shell Litigation”? Why are all the discussions pertaining to the affirmed affidavit directed to Mr. Alfred Donovan only? What were the motives? Why did Shell prefer that I be dragged into matters I have nothing to do with? Such modus operandi has been consistent throughout the proceedings and are still the tactics being used against me as we progress to the trial at the Malaysian High Court.  Is it morally or legally proper for someone to be persecuted for alleged acts for which another person has repeatedly and consistently admitted responsibility? I find it hard to believe that this situation is being allowed to continue and I will make my feelings known publicly immediately I am free to do so. Frankly I am ready to explode at the injustice of the way I have been treated in blatant breach of the fundamental human rights proclaimed by the United Nations. Human rights incidentally which Shell purports to support.

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 new judge. The case was scheduled for hearing on the 28th April 2008 but 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 the legal profession. As was replied to the Statement of Claim in the defamation lawsuit, the information obtained in the Industrial Court case will be extensive and damning for Shell.

I am afraid that the legal documents for my defamation case, so far, were also not filed properly with registration numbers, dates and time.  You just have to see how the American judiciary filed their Court papers for the reserve fraud mentioned and found in the website shown above. Here is an example to link  http://www.shellnews.net/classactiondocs/Searchable_Barendregt_Depo_OCR.pdf.  This is an “entire searchable deposition of Royal Dutch Shell Group Reserves Auditor, Anton Barendregt – 32mb pdf FILE, 965 Pages..”. Have a look at the front, body and end pages and I wish those pertinent elements were emulated in the cause papers. Who is supposed to be responsible and accountable for all these unprofessional behaviors?

8. The Donovan’s have written many articles and published many articles relating to Shell from all sources, whether, they are positive or negative, “the good, the bad and the ugly”.  If Shell is unhappy Shell ought to take issue with them.  Some of the other articles where the Donovan’s have mentioned and written about me are found in the links below.  Please bear in mind that they are neither my servants, nor my agents and as an unemployed ex-Shell employee, I have no money to hire anyone, leave alone British citizens whose hourly pay is something I do not want to think about.

06/12/2006  ShellNews.net: EMAIL TO THE BORNEO BULLETIN: NEWS BLACKOUT ON ROYAL DUTCH SHELL GROUP vs. Dr JOHN HUONG <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2006/12/06/shellnewsnet-email-to-the-borneo-bulletin-news-blackout-on-royal-dutch-shell-group-vs-dr-john-huong/>

25/02/2007: The ludicrous claim that Shell is the world’s best oil company in sustainability, CSR, governance, ethics and transparency <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/02/25/the-ludicrous-claim-that-shell-is-the-world%e2%80%99s-best-oil-company-in-sustainability-csr-governance-ethics-and-transparency/>

07/07/2007: A blunt speech about Shell and its track record in Nigeria: by Alfred Donovan <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/07/07/a-blunt-speech-about-shell-and-its-track-record-in-nigeria-by-alfred-donovan/>

28/07/2007: Reuters: Internet censorship spreading: OSCE study (*In August a Malaysian court will hear Shell’s application to have whistleblower Dr John Huong jailed) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/07/28/reuters-internet-censorship-spreading-osce-study-in-august-a-malaysian-court-will-hear-shells-application-to-have-whistleblower-dr-john-huong-jailed/>

20/03/2007  Decision day looms for 399 former Shell employees suing Shell Malaysia for unlawful deduction from retirement fund :  <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/03/20/decision-day-looms-for-399-former-shell-employees-suing-shell-malaysia-for-unlawful-deduction-from-retirement-fund/>

27/04/2007: Bernama, Malaysia: Petronas, ExxonMobil & Shell Create Merdeka Award (* will Dr John Huong be Shell’s first nomination?) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/08/27/bernama-malaysia-petronas-exxonmobil-shell-create-merdeka-award-will-dr-john-huong-will-be-shells-first-nomination/>

06/08/2007   In High Praise of Mr Michiel Brandjes, Company Secretary and General Counsel Corporate, Royal Dutch Shell Plc:  <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/08/06/in-high-praise-of-mr-michiel-brandjes-company-secretary-and-general-counsel-corporate-royal-dutch-shell-plc/>

07/08/2007  Email to Mr Saw Choo Boon, Chairman of Shell Malaysia <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/08/07/email-to-mr-saw-choo-boon-chairman-of-shell-malaysia/>

09/08/2007: Huliq News NC: Royal Dutch Shell in blog site defamation quagmire <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/08/09/huliq-news-nc-royal-dutch-shell-in-blog-site-defamation-quagmire/>

03/09/2007: New Straits Times (Malaysia): NSTP wins 6 press awards (*cosy relationship between Shell, the Malaysian Government and Malaysian Press) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/09/03/new-straits-times-malaysia-nstp-wins-6-press-awards-cosy-relationship-between-shell-the-malaysian-government-and-malaysian-press/>

25/09/2007  CORRUPTION CRISIS IN MALAYSIAN JUDICIARY IMPACTS ON SHELL LITIGATION <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/09/25/corruption-crisis-in-malaysian-judiciary-impacts-on-shell-litigation/> :

25/09/2007  Malaysia: Judiciary and corruption (For obvious reasons the legal jurisdiction of choice for Shell) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/09/27/malaysia-judiciary-and-corruption-for-obvious-reasons-the-legal-jurisdiction-of-choice-for-shell/> :

29/09/2007: The Times: Shell Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Wildlife photos go on display <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/09/29/the-times-shell-wildlife-photographer-of-the-year-wildlife-photos-go-on-display/>

30/09/2007   EXTRACTS FROM POSTINGS ON OUR WEBSITE IN JUNE 2004 IN THE NAME OF FAMED SHELL WHISTLEBLOWER DR JOHN HUONG <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/09/30/extracts-from-postings-on-our-website-in-june-2004-in-the-name-of-famed-shell-whistleblower-dr-john-huong/> :

31/10/2007  HRH Sultan Azlan Shah speaks out on crisis in Malaysian judiciary <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/10/31/hrh-sultan-azlan-shah-speaks-out-on-crisis-in-malaysian-judiciary/> :

18/10/2007: Reckless approach of Royal Dutch Shell to HSE <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/10/18/reckless-approach-of-royal-dutch-shell-to-hse/>

6 November 2007: Shell affidavit affirmed

13/11/2007: Insight into the secret machinations of Royal Dutch Shell Execs <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/11/13/insight-into-the-secret-machinations-of-royal-dutch-shell-execs/>

18/11/2007:  malaysiakini.com: Empower royal panel with ‘widest terms of reference’: the ‘rot’ in Malaysian judiciary (where Shell is suing Dr John Huong) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/11/18/malaysiakinicom-empower-royal-panel-with-widest-terms-of-reference-the-rot-in-malaysian-judiciary-where-shell-is-suing-dr-john-huong/>

10/12/2007  Is Royal Dutch Shell a racist company? <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2007/12/10/is-royal-dutch-shell-a-racist-company/>

03/02/2008: Response to Live Chat Guest 6967 <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/02/03/response-to-live-chat-guest-6967/>

14/02/2008  Malaysia: Shell’s legal jurisdiction of choice: justice  <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/02/14/malaysia-shell%e2%80%99s-legal-jurisdiction-of-choice/> can be bought by the highest bidder <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/02/14/malaysia-shell%e2%80%99s-legal-jurisdiction-of-choice/>

16/02/2008: The Shell whistleblower buried alive in litigation by EIGHT Royal Dutch Shell companies <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/02/16/the-shell-whistleblower-buried-alive-in-litigation-by-eight-royal-dutch-shell-companies/> :

18/02/2008: A message to Shell whistleblower 5388 <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/02/18/a-message-to-shell-whistleblower-5388/>

01/03/2008:  Throwing mud at Shell (updated) <http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/03/01/throwing-mud-at-shell/>

Mr. Trevor, please keep all documentations and recordings properly on our side in your inventory.  Pending the advise of my extended family, I may lodged reports to the police, the Malaysian Judiciary and any relevant parties in due course.  This email is to get some of my thoughts out of my mind and I will be sending you a finalized copy in the future. By the way, can you please give me the name, postal address, email address and phone number for the Minister of Welfare in Kuala Lumpur?

Related E-mails Attachments 1-4 are shown below.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Dr. John Huong

E-MAIL ATTACHMENT 1

Date:              Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:01:21 -0700 (PDT)

From:              “John Huong” <jh_.com>

Subject:         Confirm authors, changes if any?

To:                  “John Donovan” [email protected]

Dear Mr. Donovans,

Good evening.

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.

1. CORRUPTION CRISIS IN MALAYSIAN JUDICIARY IMPACTS ON SHELL LITIGATION

2. Malaysia: Judiciary and corruption (For obvious reasons the legal jurisdiction of choice for Shell)

3. HRH Sultan Azlan Shah speaks out on crisis in Malaysian judiciary.

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.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. John Huong

E-MAIL ATTACHMENT 2

Date:                 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:15:03 +0100
From:                      “John Donovan” <[email protected]>
To:                  “John Huong” [email protected]
Subject:              Re: Confirm authors, changes if any?

Hello Dr Huong

It is nice to hear from you. We are extremely busy at the moment with a complete change of our IT set up so I will have to answer in a briefer form than I would ideally prefer.

The first article (1.) was authored by my father and me and the second (2) and third (3) by me alone.

I cannot recall any subsequent changes to the original publications.

The source information was brought to our attention by a Malaysian national involved in the retirement fund litigation with Shell. I believe we have email correspondence to prove this fact but I simply do not have the time tonight to check.

I am astonished that Shell is apparently taking action against you when you have absolutely no involvement or advance knowledge of the relevant articles.

If Shell takes issue with anything stated in the relevant articles they should take action against the authors and publishers as admitted in this email, namely Alfred Donovan and John Donovan in respect of the first article and John Donovan (me) in regards to the other two.

Shell cannot possibly have any evidence to prove any involvement on your part as none exists.

Yours sincerely
John Donovan

E-MAIL ATTACHMENT 3

Date:              Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:47:39 -0700 (PDT)

From:              “John Huong” <[email protected]>

Subject:         RE: KLHC Suit No. S2 – 41 -2004 & S2 – 23 – 38 – 2006 Sarawak Shell Bhd -v- Houng Yiu Tuong

To:                  “trevorg” [email protected]

CC:                 “‘Beh Chee Wei'” [email protected]

Dear Mr, Trevor George,

Good afternoon.

What is the status on this legal matter?

Thanks

Sincerely,

Dr. John Huong


E-MAIL ATTACHMENT 4

From:              “trevorg” <[email protected]>

Subject:         RE: KLHC Suit No. S2 – 41 -2004 & S2 – 23 – 38 – 2006 Sarawak Shell Bhd -v- Houng Yiu Tuong

Date:               Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:16:06 +0800

Dear Dr. Huong

I  trust all is well with you.

I am glad to inform that the Court agreed with our submission and expunged Shell’s last affidavit (i.e the one exhibiting the Donovan’s website write-up on the M’sian 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.

Best Regards

Trevor George De Silva

Partner

Suite 2.07-2.10, 2nd Floor, Wisma Mirama

Jalan Wisma Putra, 50460 Kuala Lumpur

Tel No: 03-21448336

Fax No: 03-21447336

Writer’s E-Mail: [email protected]

Website: www.leeongkandiah.com

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: