This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly on August 31, 2026 - September 6, 2026

THIRTY years ago, senior High Court judge Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid Syed Abdullah was forced to resign after the authorities discovered that he was the person who had exposed then Chief Justice Tun Mohamed Eusoff Chin and senior lawyer Datuk V K Lingam holidaying together in New Zealand.

Then, it was unheard of for a senior lawyer and his family to go on a vacation with a judge and his family, what more the highest ranking judicial officer in the country, although the parties had contended that the families had just happened to meet in New Zealand. Eusoff, who passed away on Aug 7, had claimed that the meeting was a mere coincidence.

However, instead of the authorities investigating the allegation, swift action was taken against Syed Ahmad Idid, the whistleblower, who was six years in as a High Court judge serving in the commercial court.

Syed Ahmad Idid explains that he had penned the exposé as he was afraid of what was to occur or become of Malaysia if an independent judiciary succumbed to such unwanted relationships.

A former customs officer for six years and then head of legal at a private bank before being a judge, he was concerned that the possibility of such abuses or corruption would be detrimental to a young independent country like Malaysia.

“When officials came to my [judge’s] chambers on June 28, 1996, I was offered two options. As I had just recently survived a heart attack the previous year, the fear of going to jail or being placed under the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) would hurt me, so I chose to resign,” says the 88-year-old former judge.

“I wrote my resignation letter on a plain white piece of paper without any official [judge’s] letterhead and addressed it to Eusoff.”

The resignation did not appear, he says, as required under Article 125(2) of the Federal Constitution as it stipulates that a judge may resign by handing a letter to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or be removed from office via a tribunal.

Allegations involving the judiciary emerged again in late 2007, when a Royal Commission of Inquiry was established to look into a video recording over purported judicial fixing known as Lingamgate. The findings in 2008 recommended action against six people, including Eusoff and Lingam.

The other four were former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad; former CJ and Chief Judge of Malaya at the critical time when the video was made in 2001, namely Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim; businessman Tan Sri Vincent Tan and former minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor.

However, no action was taken against any of the individuals.

The Edge recently caught up with Syed Ahmad Idid, who reminisced on the days before and after his resignation on July 1, 1996, when he was 58.

Although it has been three decades, he wishes to set the record straight over the whole affair. He is also seeking his unpaid pension, having paid dearly for whistleblowing.

The former judge says he had not widely distributed the letter — which some had described as “the poison-pen letter” — as claimed.

“I only passed the letter to four people, namely the then Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Rahim Noor, the then Attorney General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, Eusoff and Pak Lah (the late Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi),” he says.

“Somehow, the letter and its contents were distributed to others at a judicial conference in Sarawak in March 1996, with an introductory letter that was clearly not my doing and typeset. Hence, this is the reason I believed this was done by a government official,” he asserts.

Mohtar had called the allegations a “poison-pen” letter and described it as an “Ides of March” move, in launching investigations into the whistleblower.

“The investigation is aimed at striking at the venomous elements that are out to discredit the judiciary and subvert justice in our beloved country.

“As AG and public prosecutor, it is my duty and responsibility to ensure that the judiciary and the legal profession be cleansed of these treacherous elements who, by their vile, insidious, devious and scurrilous allegations in this pamphlet, had sought to undermine the integrity of the judiciary and the administration of justice in this country.

“Today is the Ides of March. But unlike that fateful day in ancient Rome, when brutish beasts succeeded in killing Caesar, today we launch this pre-emptive strike at these conspirators and, inshallah [God willing], we will ferret them out, whoever they are, and bring them to justice,” the then AG had said.

Syed Ahmad Idid says there were a few who felt otherwise and claims even then retired IGP Tun Hanif Omar or Mohtar’s predecessor Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman had commented that the allegations should have been investigated rather than the whistleblower.

Even though Malaysia has enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Syed Ahmad Idid is of the view that following what happened to him 30 years ago, his forced resignation without pension has resulted in many not wanting to or being brave enough to expose wrongdoers.

“I hope the people can see if the judiciary has improved since then, and the sum total of each judge’s performance spells its standing in our country.

“The nation is paying the price. When they ‘killed’ me as a whistleblower, they frightened every other honest Malaysian. As a result, others are now afraid to come forward and expose secrets like 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), Tabung Haji and other scandals that have resulted in billions of losses.

“For 50 honest people, 49 will keep quiet and even if we have one, that person is muzzled. People are using my exposé as an example to look at what happened to the judge. This frightened honest people and, as a result of this, they do not want to expose any wrongdoing for fear of prosecution.

“The result [is that], all these honest people do not want to speak out and now we are paying the price [with the many cases of corruption and abuse of power]. This problem [corruption and abuse of power] will not go away. We have lost a generation of honest people who are willing to come forward, not wanting to expose wrongdoing due to my removal.”

When Syed Ahmad Idid’s plight was first highlighted by news portal Malaysiakini in 2015, former opposition leader (now Tan Sri) Lim Kit Siang had observed: “If Syed Ahmad Idid’s act of blowing the whistle in March 1996 had been heeded, resulting in thorough investigations and root-and-branch reform of the judiciary 19 years ago, Malaysian judges, lawyers and citizens would have been able to stand tall in the world today. We would have a judiciary nationally and internationally respected for its independence, integrity and quality.”

In 2025, Malaysia improved to 54th among 182 countries in the Corruption Perception Index, but despite the improvement, Syed Ahmad Idid feels that the corruption or abuse of power that resulted in massive losses for the country has not abated.

Previously as a customs officer serving in the north, he had tried to stamp out the drug menace, which current Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail described at the recent PKR party congress as endangering the Malays as those mainly affected are aged 15 and above, with many having dropped out of school. Saifuddin observed that states such as Terengganu, Perlis, Kedah and Kelantan have recorded the highest number of addicts.

“During my days at customs, we managed to stop the flow of drugs even to Singapore,” Syed Ahmad Idid says, and reveals that in an anti-smuggling operation, he was shot at with the bullet missing him by inches.

At that time, he says, he was young and had just started a family so in spite of his desire to serve, he decided to call it a day.

On the recommendation of the then Lord President the late Tun Azmi Mohamed, he read law in the UK, using his and his wife’s savings. He worked part-time at Harrods and also sold airline tickets to make ends meet.

“By selling airline tickets, I could gain a free ticket for me to return to Malaysia.”

Upon his return after graduation, he joined the legal service as a magistrate and served as a circuit judge in Brunei in the late 1970s. Subsequently, he joined Public Bank Bhd (KL:PBBANK) as its legal director before returning to the judiciary as a High Court judge in 1990, although he had considered a position at Bank Negara Malaysia.

The former judge explains that when he left the judiciary, many people shunned him for making the exposure although some felt it was right. Fellow judges were told to give him a wide berth.

“My wife told me that fellow judges’ wives had approached her and said they were ordered by the higher-ups not to approach me, for fear of being reported and blacklisted by the higher-ups as they were observing me. My friends and fellow judges had shunned and avoided me.

“I prayed to Allah to please show what I need to know is the truth and second, they [those who did him wrong] and the country akan berasa [would feel the implications of his resignation. But he left it to Allah]. After I left the judiciary, thankfully unexpected opportunities came as I was invited to give talks in Singapore, Africa, China, the Philippines and India on integrity.”

In 2004, when Abdullah became the PM, Syed Ahmad Idid was given a lifeline when he was made the director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre of Arbitration (KLRCA). During his stint there, he helped draft the Islamic arbitration rules. He served two terms and was then invited by former finance minister Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop to serve on the Standard and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia (Sirim) board after being jobless for several years.

His last post was as a director of the Tun Hussein Onn National Eye Hospital, a position he held for five years; he no longer holds any posts.

As former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and several other former Supreme Court judges who had been removed from the judiciary during the 1988 judicial crisis had received an ex-gratia payment of a reported RM10.5 million in 2008, Syed Ahmad Idid harbours similar hopes.

However, for nearly 20 years, nothing has progressed even though Lim and several former ministers have supported restoration of his pension.

“During those years, I survived on my savings from when I had worked at Public Bank, to pay off the house mortgage and others. I hope the government will return my pension.”

His wife Datin Noraini Abdullah has stood by him throughout the years.

“She has been my ‘rock of Gibraltar’. When I was a customs officer, she would prepare coffee for the night watches; when I studied law, she was willing to sell off her jewellery and belongings in Petaling Jaya to help support my pursuit of a law degree.

“Despite being forced to resign, she and the children have stood by me and I would like to thank them.”

In early August, the former judge spoke at the Malaysia Wisdom Conference, where he shared his thoughts. He remarked that all the bribes from corruption could build at least two general hospitals in every state, and that up to 50 schools in the country could be equipped with the best teachers and facilities.

“It is very sad that the top clean countries are not Islamic. Those countries [at the top of the index] respect whistleblowers, and the people themselves are respectable and honest. There is little hanky-panky in their government service and business sector. Both retired AG Abu Talib and the late retired IGP Hanif told the press they were surprised that the allegations in my memorandum were not investigated.

“Perhaps it is timely if I offer a view of the difference between whistleblower and poison-pen letter. I’ll give you these instances. A whistleblower is an insider who reports illegal, unsafe or unethical activities inside a public or private organisation or enterprise to people in authority or the public. He sees bad behaviour first-hand. This is what the whistleblower does. Fraud, corruption, rule-breaking, safety hazards, or any other criminal activities. And why does it matter?”

It matters because it helps to stop corruption and fix dangerous workplace problems, he said, and acts as a check and balance.

Whistleblowing is not fitnah (slander), he stressed, but an act of justice.

“If whistleblowing had been encouraged and treated as respectable, then 1MDB could have been stopped at an early stage. Then Felda in 2017. There were insiders, very honest people, but they were scared to speak out. Mara; the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), where RM6.5 billion was paid out but the ships were not there; KWAP — all these.

“And, of course, the latest is Tabung Haji. I mean, if you can go to that low level, where else can you go?” he asked during the forum.

On the proposed separation of the AG’s and public prosecutor’s office, Syed Ahmad Idid is of the view that what is even more important is the quality of the person who holds the post.

“This applies to all sectors, the civil servants, judiciary, the AG or PP, it is the quality of the person who holds the post as they must be honest.”

His final word on justice and honesty is a verse from the Quran that he holds dear (Surah An-Nisa Chapter Four), Verse 135:

“O you who have believed, be persistent standing firm in justice, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well acquainted with all that ye do.”

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's App Store and Android's Google Play.