Surely Eusoff Chin's unsolicited "advice" to justice Muhammad Kamil Awang that there were two earlier decisions, both resulting in election petitions being struck off on the grounds that electoral rolls were sacrosanct and so beyond question, in itself begs the question.

What need was there for Eusoff to give such advice in the manner in which it was given bearing in mind that that was the vexing problem facing justice Kamil - tainted and corrupted electoral rolls and so the need to go behind them?

It is no more a question of whether such a call was made or what was said in that call. That is all beyond dispute now. It was made, and made by Eusoff to one of his subordinates.

At times the timing of "advice", the form of advice, and its nature, delivers a strong and clear message to the recipient. Isn't that the traditional Malaysian way of achieving ends?

It is no more a question of splitting hairs as to when justice Kamil raised the matter or why he waited till now. He has raised it and a lesser mortal than Eusoff would by now have been hauled off to the courts for gross and blatant interference in judicial proceedings.

Justice must be fair and the law must be equally applied. In the classic style of the Attorney- General's Chamber's, and the police's, way of determining such matters - can we have another prosecution and let the courts decide? Mattress and all!