I found the following statement in today's Malaysiakini report:
However, the lawyer’s office clarified that "Arulampalam does not represent Balasubramaniam, but was just his representative."
OK, I'm not so good at the Legalese language, but this one left me befuddled... A does not represent B but was just his representative... ??? Perhaps they mean that A is not the official legal counsel/representative, but just a stand-in representative. Or it was another misquotation by the press.
Maybe they'll clarify tomorrow. Or maybe they'll issue another statutory declaration. Commissioners of oaths must be making good money these days.
Friday, July 04, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment