IV

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 658

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to Dato

Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 27, 2000

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. LANTOS, Mr.

ROHRABACHER, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, and Mr. WEXLER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

International Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with

respect to Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Whereas on September 2, 1998, Malaysia’s Prime Minister

Mahathir Mohammed dismissed Deputy Prime Minister

Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim;

Whereas, reportedly as a result of political disagreements,

Dato Seri Anwar was arrested on September 20, 1998;

Whereas when Dato Seri Anwar appeared at his arraignment,

he told the judge of the severe mistreatment he sustained

on his first night of detention;

Whereas Dr. Mahathir suggested that Dato Seri Anwar inflicted the injuries on himself in order to gain public sympathy;
2

•HRES 658 IH

Whereas on September 29, 1998, Dato Seri Anwar was formally charged with nine counts of corruption and sexual

misconduct, including four sodomy counts, to which another count was later added;

Whereas the vague nature of the charges, as well as the fact

that several of the Government’s witnesses recanted, cast

serious doubt on the validity of the charges, which appear

to have been fabricated to discredit Dato Seri Anwar;

Whereas on April 19, 1999, Dato Seri Anwar was convicted

on four counts of corruption and sentenced to six years

of imprisonment;

Whereas on August 8, 2000, Dato Seri Anwar was convicted

of sodomy and sentenced to an additional nine years in

prison;

Whereas both trials were marred by serious irregularities,

including—

(1) the refusal of the trial judge to allow representatives of news media to be present when testimony favorable to the defense was being given,

(2) the imposition by the judge of a national ‘‘gag

order’’ prohibiting any Malaysian citizen from discussing

the guilt or innocence of Dato Seri Anwar,

(3) the changing by the prosecution of the dates on

which the alleged incidents of sodomy were said to have

occurred, after learning that the building where the incidents allegedly happened had not yet been built and

again after learning that Dato Seri Anwar was not in

the country on the revised date, and
3

•HRES 658 IH

(4) the admission by the trial judge of a ‘‘voluntary’’ confession from a witness who had reportedly

suffered severe physical and psychological abuse at the

hands of the police before giving his confession;

Whereas the Governments of Australia, New Zealand, the

United Kingdom, and other nations, as well as the European Union, have condemned the Malaysian Government’s actions in this case;

Whereas international organizations, including Amnesty

International and Human Rights Watch consider Dato

Seri Anwar to be a prisoner of conscience;

Whereas the United States Department of State Human

Rights Report of 2000 highlights the irregularities surrounding Dato Seri Anwar’s trial and the continued deterioration of the judiciary in Malaysia;

Whereas the imprisonment of Dato Seri Anwar represents a

breakdown in democracy and the rule of law in Malaysia;

and

Whereas the Government’s actions in the case of Dato Seri

Anwar represent a breakdown in democracy and the rule

of law in Malaysia, and thus damage the international

reputation of the Malaysian Government, and have the

potential to harm relations between the Government of

the United States and the Government of Malaysia: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that—

3 (1) the Government of Malaysia should provide

4 Dato Seri Anwar with due process of law either by
4

•HRES 658 IH

1 offering him a new trial under fair and transparent

2 procedures or by dismissing all charges against him;

3 and

4 (2) all Malaysians should be allowed to exercise

5 their fundamental right to peaceful expression of po6 litical opinion, without fear of arrest or intimidation,

7 and should be afforded due process of law in all

8 cases.

Æ