• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Malaysia On Trial Along With Anwar — Barry Wain

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
The last time Malaysia’s former deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was charged with sodomy, the country’s judicial system was on trial. This time around, the stakes are even higher.

If Anwar is convicted, in a case that opened in Kuala Lumpur’s High Court on Tuesday, Malaysians can wave goodbye to the best chance of developing a two-party political system in more than half a century.

It will also end any real prospect of Malaysia extricating itself from corrosive race-based politics, and signal the former British territory’s continued descent into self-destructive extremism.

Over the past two years, the charismatic Anwar, 62, has achieved what many analysts thought was impossible. He has tacked together three disparate political parties and formed a credible — if still fragile — opposition, representing hope for a multiracial future.

Nobody else has the organisational ability, political skills and personal trust to hold them together and provide the People’s Front, as it calls itself, with dynamic leadership.

Anwar’s legal problems should be seen in this light.

In 1998, then-prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad sacked Anwar as deputy premier and finance minister because he suspected Anwar was using the turmoil of the Asian economic crisis to challenge him.

Beaten viciously in custody, Anwar spent years in jail after being found guilty of corruption and sodomy in trials regarded as fatally flawed by international legal authorities. He was cleared of sodomy on appeal, but banned from seeking public office for five years.

On his return, he galvanised the fragmented opposition into a stunning psychological victory in 2008, capturing five of Malaysia’s 13 states and denying the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition its customary two-thirds majority in parliament.

The opposition was able to make such gains by tapping into the “politics of disgust”, winning the support of Malaysians alienated by rampant corruption and cronyism. Significant numbers of them crossed ethnic lines to vote for candidates promising reform.

Anwar targeted the affirmative action program called the New Economic Policy, which is supposed to channel economic benefits to native peoples, predominantly Malays. The policy has been widely abused to enrich better-off Malays, notably members of the ruling United Malays National Organisation (Umno), the dominant party in the 13-member Barisan Nasional.

In a bold move, Anwar formulated an alternative new economic agenda to assist all poor Malaysians, based on need rather than ethnicity. Not only did droves of disaffected Chinese and Indians desert the government, but a significant percentage of Malays also switched allegiance.

Umno, in power since Malaysia gained independence in 1957, has reacted badly to its setback. Faced with the possibility of defeat at the next elections, due in 2013, the party has concentrated on sabotaging the resurgent opposition rather than reforming itself.

Like the rerun of a bad movie, Anwar was promptly arrested and charged again with sodomy, this time on the complaint of a university drop-out who had worked briefly for Anwar. Consensual sex between males is illegal in Malaysia, punishable by 20 years’ imprisonment and caning, though the law is rarely enforced.

The public perception in Malaysia is that “Sodomy II, as the local media dub it, is entirely political, a view shared by the international community. An Amnesty International spokesman has characterised the trial as “the same old dirty tricks” to remove Anwar from politics.

Umno has also resorted to scaremongering, using race and religion to reinforce the fear among Malays, the majority community, that they are besieged and under threat.

Umno was blamed for fanning racial tension when arsonists last month attacked 10 churches across the country, after a court ruled that Christians could use the Arabic word “Allah” as a translation for ‘‘God’’ in the Malay language. The government insists “Allah” should be reserved solely for Muslims, despite widespread use of the word by Christians and other minorities in Arabic-speaking countries and places such as Indonesia.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, elected president of Umno last year to replace the discredited Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and stem Umno’s decline, has talked reform and even made minor adjustments to affirmative action. But while he promotes an inclusive vision for the country under the slogan of “1 Malaysia”, an Umno-owned newspaper often carries racist commentaries.

Anwar and his allies in the People’s Front have found the going rough in the past two years. Through a mixture of inexperience and incompetence, they have underperformed in the states they control.

Still, if Anwar is jailed for sodomy, it will not only end his political career but also terminate an attempt to open up the economic and political systems of one of the Muslim world’s most important countries. — The Age
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
There They Go Again

The opposition leader treads a familiar path into the dock.

UMNO has been scheming to weaken the opposition, which won five out of 13 states in March 2008 elections that stunned the ruling coalition. Last year it seized back one of those states, Perak, by luring defectors. Then it tried, in vain, to peel off an Islamic party in Mr Anwar’s alliance.

The Economist

SLINGING m&d at opponents is a staple of most democracies, even if voters might prefer a more sensible debate. In Malaysia, a prudish, majority-Muslim country, it seems that nothing succeeds quite like below-the-belt personal attacks. For Anwar Ibrahim, the opposition leader and former deputy prime minister, who went on trial this week accused of sodomising a young male aide, the tactic is wearily familiar. In 1998 he was charged with the same crime, found guilty and jailed. Exonerated and freed, he has staged a comeback that another conviction might jeopardise.

Much has changed in Malaysia since Mr Anwar last took the stand. His nemesis, the country’s longest-serving prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, who presided over his downfall, has retired, if not exactly gracefully or quietly. The once-mighty United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), which leads a 13-party multiracial governing coalition, looks increasingly vulnerable at a future election. A judiciary that was seen as beholden to its political masters has begun to assert its independence, and has sided with free-speech plaintiffs in prickly faith-related cases.

That independence will be put to the test in “Sodomy 2.0”, as Malaysia’s press has taken to calling Mr Anwar’s trial. His lawyers have pressed for the disclosure of prosecution evidence, including medical reports of the accuser, Saiful Bukhari. He told the court on February 3rd that Mr Anwar coerced him into having sex, which would be illegal in Malaysia and punishable by up to 20 years in jail. Mr Saiful worked briefly for Mr Anwar in 2008, when he was 23. During the same period, he was seen with aides of Najib Razak, then deputy prime minister and prime minister since last April. Mr Anwar accuses Mr Najib and his wife of a conspiracy to frame him and says they should testify. Mr Najib insists he has nothing to do with the case.

UMNO has been scheming to weaken the opposition, which won five out of 13 states in March 2008 elections that stunned the ruling coalition. Last year it seized back one of those states, Perak, by luring defectors. Then it tried, in vain, to peel off an Islamic party in Mr Anwar’s alliance. An anti-corruption agency has been mobilised to dig opposition dirt, with disastrous results in the case of Teoh Beng Hock, a political aide who died last July after falling out of a window while in the agency’s custody.

Mr Anwar’s trial is a much more potent weapon for UMNO, both as a blot on the opposition leader’s image and a distraction from his politicking. UMNO-owned media will harp on the sordid details, just as they did in the first trial when a semen-stained mattress was hauled into court. The blogosphere, however, where young Malaysians get their news, may not be easily impressed. Nor, it seems, will foreign investors, whom Mr Najib is desperate to attract with promises of a more open and less UMNO-dominated economy. His government’s image is already dented by corruption scandals, including a multibillion dollar project at Port Klang that has been dogged by accusations of mismanagement and cronyism. Some Malaysians may be wondering why such matters seem to generate less heat than Mr Anwar’s alleged transgressions.

http://www.malaysia-today.net/index...-again&catid=21:special-reports&Itemid=100135
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Speech by Michael Danby, Federal Member for Melbourne Ports and Chair of the Australian Parliamentary sub-committee on Foreign Affairs.



This trial, like the first trial of Anwar Ibrahim, is a disgrace to Malaysia, a country that aspires to democratic norms, where parties change power peacefully and political opponents are not persecuted by organs of the state. Perverting the legal system for political ends by charging Anwar with sexual offences is an affront to human rights.

Michael Danby


Tonight, I want to speak out on behalf of fellow democrats around Asia, who are flabbergasted at events unfolding in Kuala Lumpur. I refer to the trial which began today of the Malaysian Opposition Leader, Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim. For the second time, the Malaysian leader of the Opposition, Anwar Ibrahim is on trial for what they call in ancient grating English, ‘Sodomy’. For the second time, the Malaysian legal system is being manipulated by supporters of the incumbent government to drive Malaysia’s best known leader Anwar Ibrahim out of national politics. For the second time, documents are being forged, witnesses are being coerced, evidence is being fabricated.

This trial, like the first trial of Anwar Ibrahim, is a disgrace to Malaysia, a country that aspires to democratic norms, where parties change power peacefully and political opponents are not persecuted by organs of the state. Perverting the legal system for political ends by charging Anwar with sexual offences is an affront to human rights. In the first place, the offences with which Anwar has been charged that should not be on the statute book. Australia abolished its laws punishing consenting adult homosexual acts decades ago, as did most advanced countries. It’s long past time that Malaysia also repealed these laws, which it inherited from British colonial times. If these laws did not exist, they could not be used for political purposes as we are currently seeing.

In the second place, everyone in Malaysia, and everyone in the international legal community, knows that Anwar is innocent of these charges. This week the Wall Street Journal published a first-hand account of how the Malaysian Special Branch police fabricated the charges that led to Anwar’s first trial in 1998. Munawar Anees recalled how he had been starved and beaten into signing a false confession which implicated Anwar. Now it’s happening again. These are the lengths to which the corrupt elements within the Malaysian ruling party are willing to go to frame Anwar and remove his threat to their power.

Malaysia is a long-time friend and ally of Australia. Over the past 40 years Malaysia has become an increasingly prosperous and successful multi-cultural society. We continue our friendly and mutually beneficial relationship with Malaysia, which is a deep economic, strategic and cultural relationship.

But Malaysia is also a country of 28 million people who have lived ever since independence more than 50 years ago under the rule of the same party, the United Malay National Organisation or UMNO. UMNO has stayed in power by playing on the Malay fears of the Chinese and Indian minorities. So long as Malaysian politics were polarised even subtlety along racial lines, so long as the Malays voted loyally for UMNO, then the self-perpetuating UMNO oligarchy, who have grown rich through long years of power and through their cozy links to business, would be safe.

That’s why Anwar Ibrahim is such a threat. For the first time Malaysia has a charismatic Malay opposition politician able to appeal to Malay voters and pose a real threat to UMNO’s hold on power. At the 2008 elections Anwar’s People’s Justice Party and its allies won 60 seats away from UMNO and its allies, creating a viable two-party system for the first time. As a result, Abdullah Badawi was deposed as Prime Minister and replaced by Najib Razak, but the threat from Anwar’s coalition continues to grow. So even though the first attempt to frame Anwar on these spurious charged had failed, the corrupt forces within UMNO have decided to try again.

I recently had the privilege of meeting Anwar Ibrahim when he was in Melbourne for the Parliament of the World’s Religions in December. He is an intelligent and articulate and passionate democrat. He is committed to a thorough reform of Malaysian government, to rid it of the cronyism, corruption and authoritarian tendencies that have gained ground since Mahathir Mohammed became Prime Minister in 1981. He is a great, although not uncritical, friend and admirer of Australia. If he were to become Malaysia’s Prime Minister our relationship with Malaysia would become even stronger.

I am pleased that in the last few hours the judge has suspended the case against Anwar for a day. I hope Prime Minister Najib and his ministers are not involved. The best way for them to prove that they are not is to intervene and have these charges withdrawn, and those responsible for fabricating them punished. Malaysia is a great country, and an emerging power in our region. It can do without the embarrassment that these disgraceful proceedings are undermining its newly won democratic credibility.

http://www.malaysia-today.net/index...fairs-&catid=21:special-reports&Itemid=100135
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Public Confidence And The Trial Of Anwar Ibrahim

Tengku Razaleigh’s official weblog

Certain features of the trial of Dato’ Sri Anwar Ibrahim pose a serious challenge to public confidence in the government. Public confidence is essential to the basic functioning of government.

1) The trial is being conducted in an overwhelmingly politicized environment. Part of its context is the earlier trial of Anwar on the same charge, a trial which was perceived worldwide as politically motivated. We do not longer live in an insulated world.

2) Pre-trial publicity by the local mainstream media has been so blatantly unbalanced as to convey the impression that the media are pursuing a political agenda. Since the local mainstream media is either government owned or tightly controlled, this translates into the impression that the government itself has an interest in its outcome.

3) Many Malaysians believe that sections of the executive and political establishment have an interest in this trial. There does not seem to have been any attempt to remove this suspicion.

In such circumstances the principle that justice must not only be done but seen to be done is breached. As in the case of the constitutional crisis in Perak and in the openly illegal denial of oil royalty payments to Terengganu and now to Kelantan, we as Malaysians suffer when our Government loses credibility domestically and internationally.

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

Member of Parliament, Gua Musang

Press statement: February 4, 2010


http://razaleigh.com/2010/02/05/anwar-trial/
 

BlueCat

Alfrescian
Loyal
if those in power want to fix anyone or their opponents,it is very easy.
Anwar is past already.
those opposition should find someone else.
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
if those in power want to fix anyone or their opponents,it is very easy.
Anwar is past already.
those opposition should find someone else.

Anwar is still the one that those Malaysians look up to but the malaysian government made the fundemental mistake of believing Anwar is irreplacable or non-expendable, hence the offensive. Informations are so important and available nowadays that they failed to realised that they are digging deeper into their own trap. This trial has already draws enough flaks as is.

1) the killings of Indians in police lock ups.

2) the killing of Teoh Beng Hock

3) the killing of Altantuya

The list will just goes on and more and more people will pick these up, not only those in the diplomatic circles but to the people of the world in general. Are they going to prosecute those reporters from overseas ?





MALAYSIA on Monday warned foreign governments not to criticise its justice system or 'meddle' in the sodomy trial of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim.

The trial, which Anwar says is a political plot to undermine the opposition, is being closely watched by Western governments whose diplomats have attended the hearings that began last week.

'Foreign diplomats and missions must respect Malaysia's legal and judicial system,' deputy foreign minister A. Kohilan Pillay told AFP. 'They are welcome to follow Anwar's trial as closely as they want but they must observe our laws and not meddle in our internal affairs by hurling all sorts of accusations,' he said.

'The case has only just begun so these foreign countries should please leave it to Malaysia's judges to decide rather than creating their own trial by making damaging comments about our system.'

Mr Kohilan did not single out any countries for criticism but the government-linked New Straits Times on Monday reported a speech to Australia's parliament by Mr Michael Danby, chairman of its sub-committee on foreign affairs.

'The Malaysian legal system is being manipulated by supporters of the incumbent government to drive... Anwar Ibrahim out of national politics,' Mr Danby told parliament last week. 'Perverting the legal system for political ends by charging Anwar with sexual offences is an affront to human rights,' he added.

The New Straits Times quoted Mr Kohilan as saying he would summon representatives of countries deemed to be interfering in the Anwar affair. -- AFP


http://malaysia-today.net/index.php...trial&catid=19:newscommentaries&Itemid=100131
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Anwar — Victim of overzealous prosecution


By Hanipa Maidin

I have been practising as a criminal lawyer for almost 16 years. I have considerable experience defending accused persons who were being charged for sexual related crimes. My experience tells me that the prosecution will never charge a person for an offence of rape or sodomy if the medical evidence is not favourable to them. It is almost an accepted rule of practice or a legal norm, as far as the offence of rape or sodomy is concerned, medical evidence operates as oxygen to the prosecution.

It seems to me that such a practice is no longer adhered to in the current ongoing trial of Anwar Ibrahim. When the accused person is Anwar Ibrahim the rule of game is suddenly and drastically changed. When Anwar is charged the prosecution no longer seems to gauge the strengths of its case on the available evidence they have. When Anwar Ibrahim is tried the prosecution will, come what may, happily proceed with the trial regardless whether it has fragile evidence or no evidence at all against him !!

The only crime Anwar committed in this case is for having the name, Anwar Ibrahim.

I believe that if another person by the name of Ibrahim Anwar or any other Ibrahims allegedly sodomised Saiful the prosecution would not charge such a person when provided with the medical report prepared by doctors in Pusat Rawatan Islam ( Pusrawi ) and Kuala Lumpur General Hospital respectively.

Both reports, as I was told by lawyers in Anwar’s legal team, contain a very damning evidence against the prosecution in that they unequivocally state that there are no visible signs of penetration of Saiful’s anus. As far as the report of the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital is concerned, it was duly signed by three doctors. So what the prosecution have in their possession are the reports certified by four doctors ( one from Pusrawi and three from KLGH ) apparently dismissing the prosecution’s theory that Saiful was ever sodomised by Anwar.

People may ask why the AG, despite such a damning evidence against the prosecution, is still adamant, and not withdraw the charge against Anwar?The reason is pretty obvious, that is the accused person is Anwar Ibrahim. When Anwar Ibrahim is tried the prosecution will not care even with the existence of a hundred medical reports exonerating Anwar Ibrahim of any sexual offence.

To the layman, this question may crop in their mind. Is the medical evidence really significant in Anwar’s trial ? The answer to that is a resounding yes. As I have indicated earlier the medical evidence is oxygen to the prosecution’s case. The prosecution case dies the moment oxygen disappears or malfunctions.

It is a rule of prudence, as the lawyers call it, in any sexual related crimes, the evidence of the complainant per se is legally insufficient . Such evidence must be corroborated by other independent evidence.

Translated into Anwar’s trial, Saiful’s evidence alone is not sufficient to convict Anwar. His evidence must be corroborated. Of course a corroboration is not needed for all crimes. But in sexual offences, corroboration is highly significant in order to support the factum ( act ) of the alleged sodomy.

Why corroborative evidence is necessary in sexual related cases ? The legal practitioners say such evidence is needed because of the nature of such offences. In any rape or sodomy case it is relatively easy to allege that a crime has been committed by such and such person but it is on the other hand difficult for any person who is being charged to such offences to disprove such an allegation.

We can see clearly even before the court passes any verdict on Anwar, judging from the media coverage which appeared in Utusan and other BN’s controlled media, Anwar is as good as being found “guilty” by these so called juries. The media coverage was so vicious that one wonders whether Anwar’s, or for that matter, his family’s dignity brings any value to this irresponsible media.

The law says if you accuse somebody of committing a sodomy against you the law requires you to furnish corroborative evidence to support your allegation. That is why even in Islamic criminal law if a person is charged for sodomy, the prosecution must bring four witnesses who really see the actual penetration. That shows Islam also takes into account corroborative evidence.

And in Islam the standard of proof in sodomy case is very high indeed that is the prosecution must prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt, and the present standard of proof in civil law which is only beyond reasonable doubt. Thus in Islam any iota of doubt must be ruled in favour of the accused based on the maxim that “ the offence of hudud is withdrawn whenever iota of doubt is present ” . Islam holds the view that it is much wiser for a judge to err in acquitting 10 guilty persons rather than to err in convicting even one innocent person !!

In sodomy , like a crime of rape, the essential element which needs to be proven by the prosecution is the act of penetration itself. In Islamic law the same element also needs to be established by the prosecution in certainty.

Now how is the prosecution able to prove the element of penetration if they do not produce the medical reports/evidence? And how are the medical reports in Anwar’s trial useful to prosecution if they clearly say no visible signs of penetration to Saiful’s anus. The medical evidence is supposed to corroborate Saiful’s evidence but apparently in this case the same medical reports in fact exonerate Anwar Ibrahim. The rule is so simple : no penetration no prosecution. But the AG seems to hold the view that yes, no penetration but mind you we still have persecution to do!!

It is beyond question if Anwar is tried under the Islamic law, the charge, as it is presently framed against him, will never see the light of the day. Seeing the oral testimony of Saiful so far one cannot avoid to jump to the conclusion that it was a groundless or trumped up charge.

The AG should exhibit a high level of professionalism and integrity in the Anwar’s case. Intellectual honesty dictates that the prosecution should withdraw the charge against Anwar Ibrahim. Period. To prosecute a person in the absence of credible evidence is definitely tantamount to a prosecutorial misconduct and wastage of public funds.

The day that AG becomes the tool of the crooked politicians should have passed after the election tsunami in 2008.



Mohamed Hanipa Maidin sits on the Pas central committee and is the Pas legal adviser. He is also a lawyer who blogs at http://peguampas.blogspot.com/
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Malaysia veering towards instability, says Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC)

By Lee Wei Lian



Events since New Year’s Day have given the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) the impression that the situation in Malaysia is becoming increasingly unstable.

In a blistering report on Malaysia released at the end of January, PERC also asserted that a group of elite minorities were dominating the national agenda to the extent that it was hurting Malaysia’s attractiveness to investors.

The consultancy, which also publishes reports on the risk ratings of other Asian countries, said it is “probable” that no other Asian country is suffering from as much bad press as Malaysia. Among the developments that caught its attention were the theft of military jet engines, detention of terror suspects from a number of African and Middle East countries following warnings that Islamic militants were planning attacks on foreigners at resorts in Sabah, renewed ethnic and religious “violence” that included arson at some churches and desecration of mosques, and controversy over the integrity of key institutions like the judicial system in the sodomy trial of opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

“Events of the past month give the impression that pressures are building and the entire situation is becoming much more unstable,” said PERC.

The report noted that the government is blaming the international media for exaggerated reporting and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had argued that the focus should not be on the fringe groups that are causing problems but on the majority of Malaysians who are coming together to condemn the recent acts of violence following the ‘Allah’ controversy. But PERC maintained that the root of the problem was a vocal minority that is dominating the national agenda.

“Mr. Razak’s attempt to put the best spin on a bad situation is understandable. He is fighting for his political life and is trying to stop the erosion in confidence in Malaysia’s prospects,” said PERC. “However, he is wrong in saying that Malaysia is being defined by the way the majority of the population are coming together. It is being defined by the ability of a minority(read UMNO) to dominate the political agenda, shaping policy and compromising the reputation of key institutions in ways that hurt Malaysia’s reputation as a stable, attractive place for foreign investors.”

The report also said that while Islamic activists which are “threatening Malaysia’s secular credentials” are getting the widest coverage, it was the Umno elites, described as “a fringe group of insiders who have been able to profit disproportionately from the policies of the ruling coalition” that deserved the most attention.

“They are threatened with a loss of political power that could also impinge directly on their substantial business interests. Malaysia’s future will be determined largely by the tactics this group of insider elites resort to in order to stay in power and the success of those tactics. Their commitment to democracy is a major question mark. If they blatantly manipulate the system in order to remain in power, the public backlash could be worse than anything Malaysia has seen in its modern history.”

PERC added Najib’s strategy is looking “increasingly unworkable” as a way to defuse pressures in the country.

“He is trying to be all things to all people, but in the end he might satisfy no one,” it noted.

Malaysia’s risk index as calculated by PERC rose slightly from 5.24 out of a possible maximum score of 10 in December to 5.4 in January. It however, remained well below the risk index in January last year which stood at 6.42. Countries that score higher on the index are deemed to have a higher level of risk.

The PERC report comes as the Najib administration is grappling with a budget deficit and is trying to formulate a new economic model in which private investment plays a bigger role in driving the economy towards developed status.

The consultancy pointed out however that even if the opposition were to be in charge come the next election, foreign investors and others would wait and see if the opposition could govern the country effectively.

“So far the only thing uniting these (opposition) parties is their opposition to the ruling coalition, not matters like dealing with Malay entitlements, the extent that there should or should not be a broader Islamisation of Malaysia, or an economic programme for promoting the country’s development,” said PERC.

PERC maintained in its report that foreign investments into Malaysia have not been forthcoming, either in direct form or in the equity markets.

“Foreign companies and investors are remaining cautious until they see how Malaysia gets its own house in order,” it added.


http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/...alaysia-veering-towards-instability-says-perc
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Letter from 50 Australian MPs to the Malaysian High Commissioner


His Excellency Salman Bin L Ahmad
High Commissioner for Malaysia
Malaysian High Commission
7 Perth Ave
Yarralumla ACT 2600


11/02/2010

Dear High Commissioner,

We write to you with regards to the trial of Anwar Ibrahim which is currently taking place in Kuala Lumpur.

We members of the Australian parliament believe Malaysia is an important country, an emerging power in our region, and a friend of Australia. However the trial of Anwar Ibrahim raises serious concerns for us.

While Australia and many other countries no longer have laws against sodomy we respect the right of Malaysia to determine what should be its laws relating to personal morality.

Of more serious concern however is the fact that this trial is taking place at all, particularly given the testimony of Munawar A. Anees in the Wall Street Journal (see attached) We understand that the US State Department has urged Malaysian authorities to resolve this matter in a manner that builds confidence in the impartial rule of law in Malaysia, and we agree with this sentiment. Many friendly observers of Malaysia find it difficult to believe that a leading opposition voice could be charged with sodomy a second time, and so soon after his party made major gains in national elections. It should be made known to the Malaysian Government, that in our opinion, global esteem for Malaysia will be affected by these charges against Mr Anwar. We hope that Malaysia’s authorities will not pursue these charges.

Signed



Members of the Australian Parliament

Dick Adams MP
Senator Sue Boyce
Senator Bob Brown
Senator Carol Brown
Anna Burke MP
Darren Cheeseman MP
Michael Danby MP
The Hon Bob Debus MP
Mark Dreyfus MP
The Hon Laurie Ferguson
Jenny George MP
Steve Georganas MP
The Hon Gary Gray MP
Sharon Grierson MP
Damian Hale MP
Jill Hall MP
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young
The Hon David Hawker MP
The Hon Greg Hunt MP
Senator Steven Hutchins
Julia Irwin MP
The Hon Duncan Kerr MP
Catherine King MP
Andrew Laming MP
The Hon Peter Lindsay MP
Kirsten Livermore MP
Senator Scott Ludlam
Senator Anne McEwen
Daryl Melham MP
Senator Claire Moore
Belinda Neal MP
Shayne Neumann MP
Rob Oakeshott MP
Julie Owens MP
Melissa Parke MP
Graham Perrett MP
Senator Louise Pratt
Kerry Rea MP
Bernie Ripoll MP
Janelle Saffin MP
Sid Sidebottom MP
Senator Rachel Siewert
The Hon Peter Slipper MP
Mike Symon MP
Chris Trevor MP
The Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP
The Hon Dana Vale MP
Maria Vamvakinou MP
Mal Washer MP
Senator Nick Xenophon
Tony Zappia MP



http://www.malaysia-today.net/index...missioner&catid=18:letterssurat&Itemid=100129
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
The institutions, as inherited from the British, generally worked. The judiciary was independent, it was fairly conservative but it worked and the police force was okay. And other elements in the bureaucracy worked. But after 50 years of the party being in power for 50 years, a half a century, the bureaucracy and the heads of those bureaucratic institutions have become extensions of the ruling party.

Mark Colvin, ABC News

MARK COLVIN: More than 50 Australian federal MPs have signed a letter to the Malaysian Government protesting against the trial of the former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

It's the second time Anwar has been brought to court charged with sodomy, a fact that the letter describes as hard to believe for many friendly observers of Malaysia.

The man who organised the letter, Melbourne Labor MP Michael Danby, says supporters of the incumbent government are manipulating the legal system to drive Malaysia's best known leader out of national politics.

Barry Wain is writer-in-residence at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and he says the Anwar trial and much else that's wrong with Malaysia, can be traced back to Dr Mahathir Mohamad's long rule as prime minister.

He's just published a book called Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times.

I asked him to explain the Anwar case.

BARRY WAIN: At many levels it's inexplicable because the court case is underway one doesn't want to go into all the details of it. It's sufficient to say that right from the beginning when he was accused of sodomy the second time around 18 months ago, the public opinion polls showed that almost nobody in Malaysia believed the charges, the international community does not believe the charges…

MARK COLVIN: It's widely regarded as an entirely political trial.

BARRY WAIN: It is absolutely regarded as a political trial.

MARK COLVIN: The first one was pretty clearly demonstrated as such when the inspector general of police was proved guilty of having beaten him up so badly.

BARRY WAIN: And there were other factors as well; the special branch was found to have sort of kidnapped and intimidated and tortured witnesses who were then required to testify against Anwar.

MARK COLVIN: How does it come to this though? Your book is about Dr Mahathir and you seem to really reach the conclusion that he completely broke down the separation between the state, the government and the judiciary.

BARRY WAIN: The broad area that he did most damage was in institutions; he really cut the institutions adrift in Malaysia. The institutions, as inherited from the British, generally worked. The judiciary was independent, it was fairly conservative but it worked and the police force was okay. And other elements in the bureaucracy worked.

But after 50 years of the party being in power for 50 years, a half a century, the bureaucracy and the heads of those bureaucratic institutions have become extensions of the ruling party.

And Dr Mahathir himself definitely interfered with the judiciary. He sought to subjugate the judiciary to get the political outcome he wanted and that opened a way for monetary corruption into the judiciary.

MARK COLVIN: You said at the beginning that he'd achieved some very big things and some of those are fairly obvious; there are big buildings and bridges and things that you can see; but you also say in your book that essentially he lost Malaysia a very great deal of money. How was that?

BARRY WAIN: I devoted an entire chapter to financial scandals and I excluded from that chapter just some massive projects; for instance he built a new administrative capital for Malaysia called Putrajaya and the initial price for that was something like 20 billion ringgit; it's a lot of money. If you go there and visit it now it's often looks like a bit of a ghost town.

So, ultimately whether that will be successful or not is not clear at this stage and Malaysians may have mixed feelings. I excluded those things, I even excluded his desire to build a national car; the proton, because it wasn't a financial scandal or a scam as such, it was simply it might have been misplaced but...

I just took four financial scandals and my estimate was that 50 million ringgit probably in direct losses in those. There was an attempt to rig the international tin market…

MARK COLVIN: What's that mean in say dollars?

BARRY WAIN: Well, that would have been $US20 billion at the exchange rate at the time and I think you can double that with the losses that you get through opportunity costs and other things other than the direct amounts.

MARK COLVIN: Is that known in Malaysia?

BARRY WAIN: Actually, it is known to the older generation among the politicians particularly, but it wasn't widely publicised at the time. Most of these financial scandals go back to the '80s, some of them in the early '80s; so half the population either wasn't born or was in primary school.

MARK COLVIN: So it doesn't come into play in elections for instance?

BARRY WAIN: It figured in some of the elections back there in the mid '80s and it figured in the split that took place in UMNO in 1987 when Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah the former finance minister challenged Dr Mahathir and almost defeated him.

That was the main accusation that Dr Mahathir had taken the ruling party into business and been involved in some of these scams such as trying to rig the international tin price.

MARK COLVIN: But for those not familiar with Malaysian politics it might seem puzzling as to why UMNO keeps on being re-elected given the failings that you have outlined.

BARRY WAIN: Yes and that sometimes is difficult to explain. One has to understand that political mobilisation in Malaysia takes place on racial lines, on ethnic lines, everything is on ethnic lines. Almost every party represents and ethnic group.

Constitutionally and in practice the Malays will run the country and UMNO, which is restricted of course to Malays, to a membership of Malays has always been the party of the Malays and so when it feels threatened, as it does now, it tends to play on those elements of Malay-ness and that includes Islam which is an essential element of Malay identity to rally people to the UMNO cause.

And sometimes this just plays on anxieties, plays on fears until people worry about what might happen if the Opposition, which is often portrayed in the past as predominantly Chinese, gets into power.

MARK COLVIN: It's a dangerous game?

BARRY WAIN: It's a very, very dangerous game and it's already led to extremism and again Anwar's trial can be seen as extreme. One would have hoped that Prime Minister Najib Razak, coming into power less than a year ago, might have moved to make sure that trial didn't take place.

If he was trying to, as he says he is, operating under a slogan of 'one Malaysia' and trying to bring about ethnic harmony.

MARK COLVIN: But does it mean then that Mahathir, like somebody like Lee Kuan Yu in Singapore or like President Putin in Russia is still around as a power?

BARRY WAIN: Well he's around. I don't think he has a lot of power. He has a blog site and it's a very popular one and he writes regularly on politics and buys into politics. He did help get rid of his successor, Abdullah Badawi, he turned on him very viciously.

So Dr Mahathir is there, he is a force, he's still got a fairly strongly following in the country but he doesn't by any means call the shots.

MARK COLVIN: Barry Wain, writer-in-residence at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

And you can hear a 15-minute version of that interview on our website from this evening at http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2818351.htm.


http://www.malaysia-today.net/index...laysia&catid=21:special-reports&Itemid=100135
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Karpal accuses PM and wife of being Sodomy II masterminds



Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s lawyer accused Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor today of masterminding the sodomy charge being faced by the Opposition Leader.

“As I said, there’s a black hand in this trial, and that is the hand of the present Prime Minister..there are two hands and one is of his wife,” Karpal Singh told the court today.

Anwar echoed Karpal’s accusations by shouting from the dock the words “conspiracy, blatant lies.”

Karpal's accusations was the latest allegation flung by the defence against the PM and his wife, in what appears to be an attempt to link them to an alleged "political conspiracy."

Both Najib and Rosmah has been listed down as witnesses the defence wants to call during the trial.



Karpal (pic) was addressing the court soon after the sodomy trial resumed today after he failed in his bid to disqualify High Court judge Datuk Zabidin Mohd Diah from presiding over the case.
karpal-feb18.jpg


Karpal had wanted to disqualify the judge because of dissatisfaction with the way the court had dealt with Utusan Malaysia’s coverage of the trial.

The veteran lawyer has been unrelenting in his onslaught on the judge by citing what he claimed were examples of the judge’s lack of objectivity with regards to an Utusan Malaysia report on the trial published at the beginning of Saiful Bukhari’s questioning by the prosecution.

Zabidin, in summing up his decision, said he did not see any reason why he should recuse himself from the case.

“If I were to step down from this trial, I would be running away from my responsibility as a judge who has taken an oath of office,” said Zabidin.

Karpal gave notice to the court that Anwar’s defence team would be filing an application for appeal against the decision of the judge not to recuse himself from hearing the trial.

He also urged that the trial go on and the defence team be allowed to cross-examine Saiful, and that there be no more delays.

“Accusations of delay tactics by the defence must be cleared from people’s minds,” said Karpal to the court.

At this point, Solicitor-General 2 Datuk Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden replied by stating that neither the prosecution nor the judge had ever accused the defence of utilising delay tactics in the trial.

Karpal then retorted by saying that some media organisations had been doing so.

“We are prepared to carry on. There have been demonstrations, too many things going, like the protest at the Australian Embassy.

“We don’t want a repetition of it and Pemuda Umno cannot be allowed to run wild.”

Yusof, on the other hand, stressed that the trial must continue as the defence and the prosecution owed it to the Malaysian public, not the Australians, to do so.

The judge decided, however, to adjourn the trial until March 25 pending the appeal to the Court of Appeal.

The 62-year-old Anwar is accused of sodomising Saiful at the Desa Damansara Condominium here on June 26, 2008. Anwar has denied the charge, the second time in 12 years he has faced similar charges.

The former deputy prime minister has vehemently denied the accusations hurled by Saiful, describing them as “evil, frivolous lies by those in power” when the charge was read out to him. He is charged under section 377B of the Penal Code and can be sentenced to a maximum of 20 years’ jail and whipping upon conviction. The trial is taking place 18 months after Anwar was charged in August 2008.

Anwar was charged with sodomy and corruption in 1998 after he was sacked from the Cabinet and was later convicted and jailed for both offences. He was freed in September 2004 and later resurrected his political career by winning back his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat in a by-election in 2008, which had been held in the interim by his wife.

He had earlier led the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat, to a historic sweep of five states and 82 parliamentary seats in Election 2008.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/...es-pm-and-wife-of-being-sodomy-ii-masterminds
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Recently the Wall Street Journal published a first-hand account of how the Malaysian Special Branch police fabricated the charges that led to Anwar’s first trial. Munawar Anees recalled how he had been starved and beaten into signing a false confession which implicated Anwar.

Michael Danby, The Punch

Last week saw an unusual event in Australian politics: backbench members of Parliament from both sides took a foreign affairs initiative, independent of their party leaderships. Sixty Members and Senators – Labor, Liberal, Green and independent – signed a letter which was presented to the Malaysian High Commissioner protesting against the current trial of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim on charges of “sodomy.”


anw.jpg

The author presenting the petition to Malaysian High Commissoner Salman Bin L Ahmad last Thursday.

The letter was signed by, among others, Laurie Ferguson, Malcolm Turnbull, Greg Hunt, Bob Brown, Nick Xenophon, Duncan Kerr, Deputy Speaker Anna Burke, Jennie George, Gary Gray and Mark Dreyfus QC.

It followed a speech which I gave in the House of Representatives on 3 February, in which I drew the House’s attention to the 2nd Sodomy trial in Kuala Lumpur of Anwar Ibrahim.

I’m very grateful to all the Members and Senators who signed the letter. I can’t recall another backbench initiative like this in recent times.

Why should Australian Members of Parliament stick their noses into the affairs of a country like Malaysia, which is a friend and neighbour? I would say it is precisely because Malaysia is a friend and neighbour that we care what happens there. No-one is surprised at show trials and political persecution in North Korea or Burma. When it happens in a country which is one of our region’s relative success stories, we are shocked and dismayed.

Many Australian’s have spoken for Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma’s democratically elected leader under house arrest by an authoritarian regime. In some sense these legal torments of Anwar are more egregious as they are happening in a developing democracy that says organs of the state such as the courts or police should not be used to persecute a democratic political opponent.

People-to-people contact between Australians and Malaysians has become very close in recent years, through students studying in Australia, steadily growing tourism in both directions and growing business ties. The persecution of Anwar Ibrahim, however, does not put Malaysia in a good light.

The repeated attempts by Malaysia’s ruling party to drive Anwar out of politics by framing him up on obviously false charges is a disgraceful story which has now been running for more than ten years. Anwar was Deputy Prime Minister in 1998 when he fell out with the then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad – no friend of Australia. He was arrested, beaten up, tried on faked evidence and coerced testimony, then jailed for four years, before his conviction was finally overturned in 2004. Now the same charges have been laid again.

Recently the Wall Street Journal published a first-hand account of how the Malaysian Special Branch police fabricated the charges that led to Anwar’s first trial. Munawar Anees recalled how he had been starved and beaten into signing a false confession which implicated Anwar. The same things are happening again now. It would be intolerable in any democratic country for an accuser to front at the home of the Prime Minister before he then went to the impartial Malaysian police. This is what happened to Anwar Ibrahim when has accuser was succoured by Rosman Razak, the Prime Ministers wife, before he went to charge Anwar at the Police station.

These are the tactics which Anwar’s enemies are willing to resort to, in order to eliminate the threat he poses to those currently in power.

The reason the ruling party UMNO fears Anwar is simply that he is the first Malay politician to challenge successfully its monopoly of the Malay vote, which is the basis of its long-standing hold on power. At the 2008 elections Anwar’s People’s Justice Party and its allies won 60 seats away from UMNO and its allies, creating a viable two-party system for the first time. UMNO fears that he will win the next election unless he is stopped, and it seems that at least some elements of UMNO and their allies in the police are willing to resort to any means to stop him. Their nightmare scenario is for the urban, educated Malays together with Indian and Chinese minorities together with deputies from the rebellious Sabah and Sarawah provinces, uniting to form a parliamentary majority.

Malaysia , however is not like North Korea, sealed off from world opinion. The Malaysian people and the Malaysian government care about their reputation in the region and the world. There have been demonstrations by UMNO ‘youth’ outside the Australian High Commission in Kuala Lumpur. A leading supporter of the Malaysian Prime Minister sought to deflect Malaysian opinion by responding that ‘Michael Danby, who organized the petition is a homosexual’. Sad and pathetic though such a reaction is, the response on many blogs and new sites, by ordinary Malaysians who are outraged at the trial, repudiate such prejudice and show hope for a civic discourse as Malaysia’s democratic ethos develops.

The Malaysian media reports what is said about Malaysia in other countries. That’s why an intervention such as our bipartisan letter to the High Commissioner, politely but clearly setting out our strong protest against persecution of Anwar Ibrahim, can be effective, and why it is such an important initiative. Hopefully when Anwar is free of these torments the best answer to those who would like to keep Malaysia a one party state, will be the peaceful transition to power al la Japan, Taiwan and Korea of an Opposition Government.

When that happens, Australia’s politicians will have done more to cement genuine friendship with Malaysia than oodles of “diplomacy.”



http://malaysia-today.net/index.php...trial&catid=17:guest-columnists&Itemid=100130
- Michael Danby is the Member for Melbourne Ports and Chair of the Parliamentary Sub-committee for Foreign Affairs.
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Anwar Ibrahim is the cause celebre in the court of world opinion


By Dr Chen Man Hin

Ever since Sodomy 2 trial began, the name of Anwar Ibrahim has rocketed in the major newspapers spanning the globe from east to west and north to south.

In Jakarta, Bangkok, Hong Kkong, Taiwan, Tokyo, Sydney, Washington, New York, London, Paris, Rome, Cairo, New Delhi, there was universal protest that Anwar should be tried once again on trumped up charges of sodomy.

The editorials in Bangkok Post, New York Times, Washington Post, Asian Wall Street Journal were replete with derision, mockery and scorn that a prominent opposition leader could be arraigned before the court on trumped up sodomy for a second time.

In 1998, Anwar was tried and jailed for six years on trumped up charges of sodomy. He was later exonerated from the false charges. The international community is therefore shocked with disbelief that the Malaysian Government is trying the same trick again.

They are aware that Anwar is a very strong contender to be Prime Minister. He is leader of a strong opposition coalition PAKATAN which won five states in the 2008 general elections.

The international community is also aware that the present Prime Minister Najib Razak is the mastermind of Sodomy 2 trial, with the intention of putting Awar in prison for twenty years to eliminate him as a challenger to be prime minister.

In a globalised world, democracy, justice and fair play are the rules that nations are expected to follow. any foul play or trickery is condemned. Trumped up sodomy charges against Anwar are not tolerated.

Hence Anwar has become the cause celebre of the world, and all peace loving countries will be campaigning actively to see that the trumped up charge of sodomy against Anwar iras withdrawn as soon as possible.

These strong sentiments of the international community is reflected by the protest of fifty Australian Members of Parliament to the Malaysian High Commissioner to Australia recently.

Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has voiced dissatisfaction with the action of the Malaysian Government in pressing trumped up charges of sodomy against Anwar.

DAP’s Lim Kit Siang , senior member of parliament has called for Parliament to debate on the false charges against Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Najib has dismissed lhis call, saying that ‘the problem is just a matter between two individuals’.

If this is the attitude of the Prime Minister, then it is proper for DAP to warn the Prime Minister he is putting the country in grave danger of being subject to world sanctions.

SANCTIONS

Learn from the example of Myanmar which is sufferring from sanctions imposed by UN causing great pain to Myanmar’s economy and bringing poverty and unemployment for the people.

The military junta in Myanmar in 1990 arrested and jailed Aung San Suu Kyi, opposition leader who led her party to victory in the general elections. She was put under house arrest for 14 years, and was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1991.

Anwar could be another Aung San Suu Kyi. Anwar poses a threat to Najib to be the next Prime Minister. With the sodomy 2 trial, a conviction will remove him as a threat. If this happens expect the world to impose economic sanctions.

This would be disastrous for the country. Already, capital outflows have increased 50% over last year. FDIs have fallen badly to levels much below Indonesia and Vietnam. Last year over 300,000 talented Malaysians emigrated to greener pastures.

It would be impossible to imagine the disastrous effect on the economy if Anwar were to be convicted and world sanctions are imposed.

The prime ministers vision of 1 Malaysia will be the first casualty.

THE DAP CALLS ON NAJIB TO WITHDRAW THE TRUMPED UP CHARGES OF SODOMY AGAINST ANWAR IMMEDIATELY.

http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2010/02...cause-celebrae-in-the-court-of-world-opinion/
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Anwar’s bid for more evidence ends
karpal-quote-feb25.jpg



UPDATED
By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal
PUTRAJAYA, Feb 25 — The Federal Court has dismissed Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s request to review its own Jan 29 decision barring his legal team from getting more key evidence from the prosecutors in his ongoing sodomy trial.

In a unanimous decision, the court dismissed the review application on grounds that it was not a suitable case for re-examination by another panel of judges.

"Rule 137 does not confer jurisdiction on the Federal Court to review its own decision. This is not a suitable case for review by another panel of court. Even if the panel disagrees with the decision there are no constitutional grounds to warrant a review," said judge Datuk Zulkifli Ahmad Makinuddin.

Earlier, the three-member panel led by Justices Zulkifli, Datuk Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Datuk Heliliah Mohd Yusof heard arguments from Anwar’s lawyer Karpal Singh and Solicitor-General II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.


Mohd Yusof had argued that the court is not empowered to review its decision. A review can only granted if the applicant manages to prove that "there was an error in law" and only in extremely rare cases is a review granted.

"In an application for a review by this court of its own merit, the honourable court must be satisfied that it is a case that falls within the limited grounds and very exceptional circumstances in which a court review may be made. Only if it does, the court then reviews its earlier judgment," said Mohd Yusof.

He argued that even if the court had the power to review, the applicant had not even come anywhere close to satisfying the threshold required for such a review.

Karpal had pointed out that Federal Court had jurisdiction to review its own decision in the interest of justice. He claimed that the Federal Court and Court of Appeal's decision barring Anwar from collecting evidence was an injustice, which opened up the avenue for a review.

Rule 137 of the rules of the Federal Court stipulates that the court had limited power to decide on a review of its own decision "to prevent injustice or to prevent an abuse of the process of the court."

Later outside the courtroom, Karpal told reporters that he disagreed with the ruling and was surprised that the court had made such a call on the matter.

"I'm surprised the panel had taken this course of action, in effect over-ruling the earlier panel decisions."

He said the next move was to continue with the trial, and moved to given an assurance that the decision had not affected the team's preparation whatsoever.

"I wanted to exhaust all legal remedies in the interest of my client."

The veteran lawyer added that the decision today spelt disaster for the Federal Court if left unchallenged in the near future.

"If this ruling stands, it is going to be a disaster. There must be inherent jurisdiction within the Federal Court to review some cases. The option must be there," he said.

Anwar is accused of sodomising his one-time aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at the Desa Damansara Condominium in Kuala Lumpur on June 26, 2008.

The former deputy prime minister has vehemently denied the accusations hurled by Saiful, describing them as “evil, frivolous lies by those in power” when the charge was read out to him.

He is charged under section 377B of the Penal Code and can be sentenced to a maximum of 20 years’ jail and whipping upon conviction.

The trial is taking place 18 months after Anwar was charged in court in August 2008. Anwar was charged with sodomy and corruption in 1998 after he was sacked from the Cabinet and was later convicted and jailed for both offences. He was subsequently cleared of the sodomy charge on appeal.

He was freed in September 2004 and later resurrected his political career by winning back his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat in a by-election in 2008, which had been held in the interim by his wife.


http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/...ederal-court-asked-to-review-its-own-decision
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Politically motivated charges impede his vision of a democratic Malaysia

The presence of so many foreign embassies attending Mr. Anwar's show trial is a clear expression of international concern. This is an issue on which the world must speak out.


By Paul Martin, The Globe and Mail

Anwar Ibrahim is a former deputy prime minister of Malaysia. After having differences of opinion with prime minister Mahathir Mohamad in 1998, he was removed from office, charged with sodomy and corruption - charges condemned worldwide as an attempt to remove him from politics - and imprisoned for six years. After his release in 2004, he became the leader of a coalition of opposition parties that is successfully challenging the ruling coalition's power. Mr. Anwar has now been charged again with sodomy, a charge that has again been condemned worldwide.

I have known Mr. Anwar well since the period when we each served as finance ministers for our respective countries. He is deeply committed to democracy, justice and the rule of law. And I have watched with horror how he has been treated in Malaysia because of that commitment. His initial imprisonment was seen worldwide as politically motivated. Amnesty International regarded him as a prisoner of conscience, jailed for the non-violent expression of his political opinion. After his release in 2004, he redoubled his campaign, attracting thousands to his public rallies, with the result that the historic 2008 election returned an unprecedented number of opposition candidates to Parliament. He now poses a threat to the government in the next national elections, expected in 2013 - the real reason for the latest charge.

His trial, which began Feb. 2, is widely seen as not meeting international standards for a fair trial. The former Anwar political aide who is making the sodomy accusation was reportedly seen with leading ruling coalition figures prior to the filing of the charge; Mr. Anwar's lawyers have been denied access to vital prosecution documents; and the trial has been transferred to a higher court whose judges are seen as linked to the ruling coalition's main party. It is small wonder that Michael Danby, chair of Australia's parliamentary subcommittee on foreign affairs, has charged that Malaysia's legal system is being manipulated to drive Mr. Anwar out of politics. Mr. Danby has said that Asian democrats were "flabbergasted" by the charges and that "everyone in Malaysia, and everyone in the international legal community, knows that Anwar is innocent of these charges."

The presence of so many foreign embassies attending Mr. Anwar's show trial is a clear expression of international concern. This is an issue on which the world must speak out.

If his country is to take its place among the progressive nations of the world, it is crucial that the politically motivated charge against Mr. Anwar be dropped and that he be free to pursue his vision of a democratic Malaysia, properly respectful of human rights and international law.




Paul Martin is former prime minister of Canada.

http://malaysia-today.net/index.php...-sake&catid=17:guest-columnists&Itemid=100130
 

kensington

Alfrescian
Loyal
Only divine intervention can assure justice for Anwar
Friday, 26 February 2010 15:18




Anwar can forget about getting justice from the Malaysian judicial system. Rules can be bent, rules can be ignored, rules can be overlooked when it involves Anwar. This is what the man in the street is saying.


We witnessed this nauseating so-called judicial process in both the trials concerning Anwar’s sodomy and corruption trials in 1999. In the first sodomy trial the charges were amended three times because the authorities did not know the definite date to conclusively state when the so-called sodomy was believed to have taken place then.

In the corruption trial, the presiding judge made it so difficult for the defence to mount a serious challenge to the charge. The judge even decided that he should be convinced of the relevance of the point before the defence was allowed to question the prosecution witnesses. It was so outrageously unjust that it led Malaysians to believe that Anwar had to be convicted no matter what.

Are we witnessing a similar scenario in this instance where Anwar is on trial for the second time charged with, of all things, another sodomy?

The way things are moving, it seems, only divine intervention can save him from the injustice he is being subjected to.

Today’s ruling (25 February 2010) by the Federal Court refusing to review an earlier Federal Court decision has an unsettling effect on our system of justice.

Solicitor general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden had argued that the court is not empowered to review its decision. A review can only (be) granted if the applicant manages to prove that "there was an error in law" and only in extremely rare cases is a review granted (Malaysian Insider).

There may not be “an error in law” but what course of remedy is open to the litigant when there was an error in justice? When such error involving justice is so apparent, should the court turn a blind eye to the injustice?

We are made to understand that Rule 137 of the rules of the Federal Court stipulates that the court had limited power to decide on a review of its own decision "to prevent injustice or to prevent an abuse of the process of the court" (Malaysian Insider).

Is this the reason why the law is sometimes referred to as an ass? Does this mean that an injustice and an abuse of the process of court can be tolerated and condoned by the court? Is this what rule of law is all about?

Why is Anwar being denied the list of witnesses? Why is he denied additional information and evidence which is so crucial to his defence? Is it meant to crucify him by all means as many believe it to be?

Shouldn’t the court, in all fairness, order this vital information be given to him so that the three foreign experts who are here can advise Anwar’s team of lawyers as to how to counter the so-called evidence with the prosecution?

Strangely, the court has also ruled that in spite of the fact that there was no penetration according to medical evidence, it will not dismiss the case as there is other corroborating evidence to support the charge.

Normally, penetration is most crucial in the case of rape and sodomy. In such an eventuality, other corroborating evidence may lend credence to the charge but without any positive evidence of penetration what credibility would this charge hold in any fair trial?

In the words of Lord Devlin, the court process “is to provide a civilized method of settling disputes. It is ...to remove a sense of injustice.”

Unfortunately, we have not witnessed this truth so far. The injustice has not been removed by any stretch of the imagination.


P Ramakrishnan
President
25 February 2010


http://www.aliran.com/index.php?opt...ure-justice-for-anwar&catid=93:2010&Itemid=46
 
Top