Umno will regret its Anwar ‘vendetta’ in GE14, says WSJ

The Malay Mail Online

FEBRUARY 12, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 — In an opinion piece today, financial daily Wall Street Journal (WSJ) criticised the Federal Court’s decision to convict Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy, calling it a “Pyrrhic victory” for ruling party Umno.

In its bid to stop Anwar from becoming a prime minister, WSJ said Umno had damaged Malaysia’s reputation and the fabric of society, both of which will return to haunt the ruling party in the next general election.

“Umno’s decades-long vendetta against Mr Anwar has brought discredit on Malaysia’s government and political culture,” said the article titled “Malaysia’s Anwar Shame”.

“It is likely to accelerate the ruling party’s loss of support from a maturing population repulsed by such dirty tricks. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s failure to call an end to this farce is a stain on his legacy.”

According to WSJ, Umno had resorted to a trumped-up charge against Anwar recycled from the playbook of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, rather than fight Anwar “fairly”.

“In both cases, the allegations against Mr Anwar arose as he was poised to wrest power from Umno,” said WSJ.

“In 1998, he created the ‘Reformasi’ movement that challenged government corruption and cronyism. In 2008, he established an opposition coalition that won 48 per cent of the popular vote and came close to forming a government with defectors from the ruling coalition.”

Shortly after Anwar was delivered the guilty verdict on Tuesday, a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) was released, hailing the “independence” of the judiciary and pointing out that there have been many rulings against senior government figures.

Critics later questioned the PMO’s quick release of its response to the conviction, claiming that it suggests the possibility of collusion between the government and the judiciary.

Anwar had also accused the Federal Court of being on the “dark side” for upholding his conviction of a sodomy charge that he maintained was politically motivated.

In delivering its verdict, the Federal Court said that Anwar’s claim of a political conspiracy in his second sodomy charge remains unproven and is not credible defence.

According to a press summary of its decision, the country’s top court also pointed out that Anwar’s political conspiracy allegation was given in an unsworn statement, which meant that the prosecutors and trial judge could not quiz him on his claim.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 9:03 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mahathir seemed to have crossed the Rubicon and is going for the kill in his campaign to topple Najib as Prime Minister

Former Prime Minister and UMNO’s eminence grise, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad seemed to have crossed the Rubicon and is going for the kill in his campaign to topple Datuk Seri Najib Razak as Prime Minister and add another item in his collection of the scalps of Prime Ministers and Deputy Prime Ministers in Malaysia.

Najib and his advisers might have thought that Mahathir would have been appeased at least temporarily with the Federal Court’s unconvincing dismissal of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal and sending the 67-year-old one-time nemesis of Mahathir back to prison for the third time to serve a five-year jail sentence, but it is clear that such calculations were completely misplaced.

On the very evening of the Federal Court’s two-hour decision, which was forever tarnished by the outrageous three-paragraph statement of the Prime Minister’s Office raising the strongest doubts about the full restoration of a truly independent judiciary and a just  rule of law in Malaysia, Mahathir wrote the infamous blog  “Something Rotten”, quoting Marcellus in Shakespeare’s Hamlet in the immortal remark that “something is rotten in the state of Denmark”.

It was the most ironic culmination of a most “rotten day” of all decent and rational Malaysians, which saw a patriot and nationalist who had dedicated 47 years of his life to the pursuit of freedom, justice, human dignity and national unity returning to incarceration for the third time in his life, at the age of 67 on a most ridiculous charge and outrageous legal and  judicial process.

There was no scarcity of ironies, for it was under Mahathir  during his  22-year premiership from 1981-2003 that the rot started in Malaysia, where public and political decencies still respected and observed under the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn,  were  thrown to the winds.

The ramparts of freedom, justice and human dignity came under ceaseless attack, resulting in the worsening of the rot with the destruction of  democratic institutions and the doctrine of the separation of powers; the   independence and integrity of the judiciary;  the just rule of law; professional and independent national institutions whether the civil service, the police, the elections commission or anti-corruption agency; ethical  and incorruptible leadership; a world-class education system and a dynamic and competitive economy which can compete with the rest of the world.

Yesterday marked another escalation of the battle of titans between Mahathir and Najib when the former Prime Minister declared that he would quit if he was the Prime Minister today.

He said that a PM should “make things easy” and resign if he cannot perform.

Ironically, Mahathir said this in his talk at a public forum titled ‘The Malaysian Dilemma’ in Kuala Lumpur yesterday, as Najib’s fate has morphed into a new “Malay Dilemma” for Mahathir.

While Mahathir should be applauded for adding his voice to those who questioned Najib’s brainchild, the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), saying that there shouldn’t have been a 1MDB at all and calling for accountability and transparency, is Mahathir prepared to allow his 22 years of premiership of Malaysia starting on the “rot of Denmark” to be fully investigated and examined?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 February 2015, 8:45 am and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nik Aziz, an obituary

The Malaysian Insider

12 February 2015

Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat’s death marks the loss of one of PAS’s most iconic and influential leaders – he was a cleric who has helped shape the course of the Islamist party for over three decades, and was a politician so unlike any other politician the country has seen.

Throughout his lifetime, Nik Aziz always struck a humble figure. Despite having the most powerful position in a party that boasted about one million members, and retaining the Kelantan menteri besar post for over two decades, the religious teacher was content staying in his old kampong house and driving around in his own car.

His gentle, subdued manner belied his fiery, bordering on zealous, determination to turn Kelantan into the first state in Malaysia to implement the controversial Shariah criminal law, as well as his instrumental role in overthrowing a former PAS president and turning the party around.

Even as his health deteriorated during his last months, the PAS spiritual adviser did not neglect his party during the recent Pengkalan Kubor by-election in Kelantan, and turned up at a PAS ceramah to deliver a brief but rousing speech.

Born on January 10, 1931 in Pulau Melaka, Kota Baru, Nik Aziz began his studies in pondok schools under the guidance of religious teachers around Kelantan and Terengganu before pursuing his tertiary education in Islamic university Darul Uloom Deoband, in India.

He obtained his Bachelor of Arts in Arabic Studies and Master of Arts in Islamic Jurisprudence from Al-Azhar University, Egypt.

He returned to Malaysia in 1962 and served as a religious teacher in Kelantan, earning him the popular nickname “Tok Guru”.

Five years later, Nik Aziz joined PAS and won the Kelantan Hilir parliamentary seat in a by-election that same year, a seat that he held until 1986.

He witnessed the transition PAS underwent under the leftist pan-Islamism leadership of Burhanuddin al Helmy, to the Malay nationalist-leadership of Asri Muda, who took over the presidency in 1970 and nearly dragged the party to its early demise.

Asri’s most controversial decision was to announce PAS’s alliance with Umno and its entry into the ruling coalition in 1972, ostensibly to strengthen Malay unity. But the move was doomed from the beginning, as many members and leaders unhappy with the decision either left or were purged from the party.

But the PAS-Umno partnership was shortlived: a disagreement between the two parties over the Kelantan menteri besar post saw PAS exit the alliance just five years later, and Kelantan, PAS’s long-treasured jewel, fell to Barisan Nasional (BN) in the 1978 general election.

Nik Aziz was appointed Kelantan state commissioner immediately after PAS lost the state to Umno.

It was Nik Aziz’s bitter, first-hand experience dealing with the fallout between Umno and PAS that has kept the two parties from venturing into another alliance decades later, despite fringe voices urging for a unity government.

Nik Aziz and the new generation of leaders, did not stand idly by as Asri led the party to one of its worst electoral losses in history; he, Abdul Hadi Awang and the other clerics in the party sought to reorient PAS as an Islamic party led by the ulama faction.

Asri was ultimately pressured to resign from the party, and in 1990, under the leadership of former PAS president Datuk Fadzil Noor, the party wrested back Kelantan and Nik Aziz was appointed menteri besar.

A year later, he succeeded former PAS president Yusof Rawa as the party’s spiritual advisor after the former passed away.

Nik Aziz held the position of menteri besar until May 6, 2013, a day after the 13th general election concluded. Throughout his 23 uninterrupted years of service, Kelantan remained a PAS stronghold even as Perak, Terengganu and Kedah fell to BN after they were briefly captured by the party.

No other PAS leader could boast being a menteri besar for such a long period of time; PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang was the Terengganu menteri besar for only one term, before losing the state to Barisan Nasional in the 2004 general election.

After relinquishing his menteri besar post, Nik Aziz continued to play an important role in both PAS and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) as the party’s spiritual adviser.

During the Selangor menteri besar crisis last year, which saw PAS threatening to break away from PR, Nik Aziz put his foot down and maintained that the party would remain with the opposition pact, even as other PAS leaders floated the idea of cooperating with Umno.

But now with his passing, the future of PAS and its role in PR is no longer so certain, and with it, the possibility of an alternative coalition to take over Putrajaya. – February 12, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 February 2015, 4:36 am and is filed under
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Outpouring of sorrow, condolence messages on social media for Nik Aziz

by Looi Sue-Chern

The Malaysian Insider

12 February 2015

Minutes after news of his passing tonight, social media users, including national leaders and politicians, tweeted their condolences to the well-respected PAS spiritual leader Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak expressed his sadness that Nik Aziz has passed on.

“Innalillahiwainnailaihirajiun. Saya sedih mendengar Tok Guru Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat telah pulang ke rahmatullah. Al-Fatihah.”

(I am sad to hear that Tok Guru Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat has returned to be with God. Al-fatihah.)

DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang tweeted that Nik Aziz’s passing was a great loss.

“Tuan Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat’s passing a great loss to nation. Deepest condolence to bereaved family. RIP. Al-FATIHAH,” he tweeted at 10.27pm.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng also tweeted: “Takziah kpd keluarga bekas MB K’tan Tok Guru Nik Aziz dan PAS serta ahli dan penyokong.”

(Condolences to the family of ex-Kelantan menteri besar Tok Guru Nik Aziz and PAS, as well as its members and supporters.)

Former Selangor menteri besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim tweeted: “Didoakan semoga Tuan Guru Nik Aziz @nikabdulaziz terus di dalam pemeliharaan Allah SWT.”

(I pray that Tuan Guru Nik Aziz will remain in the preservation of Allah.)

PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar wrote on Twitter: “Allahummagfirlahum warhamhum wa’afihim wa’fuanhum – semoga Tok Guru Nik Aziz ditempatkan bersama para anbiya’ – kami terus merindui.”

(May Tok Guru Nik Aziz be placed among the prophets. We will miss him.)

Parit Buntar MP and PAS national unity committee chairman Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa wrote a simple message to Nik Aziz after he tweeted his condolences.

“Selamat berehat Tok Guru (Rest well Tok Guru),” he wrote and posted a black and white photo of the revered leader.

PKR Youth deputy chief and Seberang Jaya assemblyman Dr Afif Bahardin, also tweeted his condolences.

“Al-Fatihah, Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz yang kita kasihi telah pergi meninggalkan kita selamanya.Nyata dua kesedihan besar minggu ini.”

(Al-Fatihah, our beloved Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz is gone forever. Clearly two big miseries this week.)

Nik Aziz, who was formerly Kelantan menteri besar, died at 9.45pm today, an hour after he was sent home to Kota Baru from Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia in Kubang Kerian, where doctors took him off respiratory support. He had been suffering from prostate cancer.

His death is the second major blow for Pakatan Rakyat this week. Two days ago, opposition leader and PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was found guilty for sodomy and is now serving a five-year jail sentence.

Messages of condolences also poured over Twitter as the public expressed their sadness.

Independent journalist and blogger Anil Netto wrote: “I will always remember Tok Guru Nik Aziz for his utter simplicity, his humble lifestyle and his openness to inter-religious dialogue.”

Ami amilia tweeted: “Innalillah.. moga roh arwah Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat ditempatkan di kalangan orang2 yg beriman.. Amin..” (May Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat’s soul be place with those who are faithful. Amen.)

Kimie tweeted: “Al-fatihah walaupun perjuangan parti berbeza tapi kite tetap seagama .. al-fatihah datuk seri nik aziz .. semoga dicucuri rahmat.” (Al-fatihah. Although our political parties’ struggles are different, we are of one faith. Al-fatihah Datuk Nik Aziz. May you be blessed.)

Erfan Daniel posted his tribute tweet of three simple words for the deceased leader. He wrote: “Old but gold.” – February 12, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 February 2015, 5:54 am and is filed under
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Economist: Umno will backslide with Anwar out of the way

The Malay Mail Online

February 13, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 13 ― Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s incarceration is detrimental to Malaysia as a weakened opposition reduces Umno’s motivation to reform, The Economist wrote today.

Calling it a “setback for the whole country”, the London-based business magazine pointed out that the opposition leader’s absence bolster’s the ruling coalition that is already “becoming a mere shell for an Umno ever more beholden to Malay-nationalist forces”.

In Election 2013, Umno reinforced its dominance over Barisan Nasional by winning more seats owing to rural Malay voters even as its partners suffered from reduced support from other ethnic communities.

“Mr Anwar, a political chameleon whose real beliefs are sometimes hard to pin down, has many critics, but he could at least credibly lead a coalition that bridges Malaysia’s ethnic divides.

“That is why his incarceration is a dark day not just for Malaysia’s opposition, but for Mr Najib and the country itself,” it wrote.

The Federal Court on Tuesday upheld the Court of Appeal’s 2014 ruling that had reversed Anwar’s acquittal of sodomising former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, and maintained the sentence of five years’ imprisonment.

Mohd Saiful was not prosecuted despite the decision to charge and convict Anwar under laws criminalising consensual anal sex, fuelling perception that Anwar’s case was politically motivated.

Yesterday, Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail revealed in a statement yesterday that Mohd Saiful was not prosecuted as he was a witness against Anwar whose case Gani likened to corruption.

Aside from the five-year sentence, The Economist noted that Malaysia bans convicts from contesting in elections for a further five years after release, effectively nullifying Anwar for at least the next two general elections.

The magazine also added that the removal of Anwar has eliminated a key distraction for Umno, whose hardliners may now turn their attention inwards at the party’s leadership.

This development could leave Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak with “little room to make good his promises of political liberalisation”.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 February 2015, 3:43 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar Ibrahim’s incarceration and its implications

Mohd Nawab Mohd Osman, Guest Contributor

New Mandala

13 February 2015

The verdict is finally out. After months of speculations over Anwar Ibrahim’s fate, the Malaysian High courts have upheld the guilty verdict for the former deputy prime minister over the charge of sodomy. The verdict was particularly surprising for some within the Opposition circles who were confident that Anwar would be freed. The verdict has in theory sealed Anwar’s political fate given that he will be in prison for five years and be barred from assuming political office for another five years. This – at 77 – would render him too old to become the next leader of the country. The verdict is likely to have long term consequences for both Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and Malaysian politics.

Prosecuting Anwar Ibrahim

Anwar Ibrahim is a key figure in Malaysian politics. He will long be remembered for changing Malaysia’s political landscape. Dismissed as a spent force following his ouster from the ruling party – the United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) – and subsequent jail term for sodomy and corruption, against all odds, he rose from the political doldrums to lead the PR to its best electoral performance in 2008. In 2013, the coalition bettered this performance by winning the popular votes.

Drawing a lesson from the old play book of former prime minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamed, the Malaysian government appealed against his earlier acquittal for sodomy. The charge was first brought against him by a former aide, Saiful Bukhari.

The court proceedings were viewed by many as clearly biased against the defence team. For instance, the court allowed DNA evidence obtained illegally to be admitted in the case. The perception that Anwar has been unfairly treated by a corrupt government will once again galvanise support for the opposition leader especially amongst younger Malaysians.

Hence, the guilty verdict has created a martyr out of Anwar and this could potentially be more threatening to the Malaysian government.

Can PR survive without Anwar?

While it was Anwar’s political savviness that initially brought the three opposition parties, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS), Democratic Action Party (DAP) and People’s Justice Party (PKR) together, he has in recent times been the source of contention between the three parties. Both PAS and DAP leaders have registered their displeasure in what they deem as Anwar’s unilateral style of decision making. Matters came to a head when Anwar initiated the controversial change of Selangor’s chief minister. Both DAP and PAS leaders were incensed by the failure of Anwar to consult them on the issue.

However, it was the conservative PAS leaders including party president, Hadi Awang who refused to support the candidature of Anwar’s wife, Wan Azizah Wan Ismail as the new chief minister. This tension was further exacerbated when PAS recently announced that the party will be tabling a hudud bill in the Kelantan state assembly, a move clearly rejected by its PR partner, the DAP.

While some have argued that these developments are clear signs that the PR is at a brink of collapse, the recent court verdict might be the instrumental factor that could reverse this trend. First, the jailing of Anwar could unite the opposition in the face of adversity. In a sign of solidarity with Anwar, all PR leaders attended the PR’s presidential council meeting in February. This was the first time that Hadi attended the meeting in more than a year. Second, this development will force PAS leaders to rethink their political strategy. Even the most hard-core of the party’s supporters are likely to demand party leaders to focus on the bigger issue of justice and unseating the BN government in the next election knowing fully well that the political mileage that PAS is likely to gain. Most importantly, the younger leaders of PR who have had significant experience working within the PR framework are likely to come forth in charting the future direction of the party.

Privately both PAS and DAP leaders admit that members of the two parties work closely at the grassroots level. In other words, the opposition alliance can still survive without Anwar. Perhaps with Anwar being out of the picture, the argument can even be made that the PR has a better chance of surviving since all parties must now coalesce around the new opposition leader.

There is little doubt that Azmin Ali will emerge as a key contender for the position of Opposition leader. Both the top leaders of PAS and DAP, Hadi Awang and Lim Kit Siang do not have a national appeal and are viewed as divisive figures.

Wan Azizah, Anwar’s wife is likely to be rejected by PAS. The party had – earlier last year – rejected her candidature as chief minister of Selangor. This leaves Azmin as the most qualified candidate who is acceptable to both DAP and PAS. Like Anwar, Azmin possess the charisma and political savviness reflected in his current tenure as chief minister of Selangor.

Najib’s political survival

The recent verdict has also discredited the current administration and Prime Minister Najib Razak even further. Regardless of whether the Malaysian judiciary has been impartial in this case, the Malaysian and international public perception is that the case and final verdict was politically motivated. Anwar’s conviction has been blamed on UMNO and Najib himself.

Public sympathy for Anwar might trigger a bigger swing away from UMNO and BN especially amongst the younger voters. Anwar himself predicted that his imprisonment will result in an increase in popular votes for the opposition.

Some UMNO conservatives have applauded the verdict. Zainuddin Maidin, former information minister and a staunch ally of Dr Mahathir, praised the judges for placing the integrity and sovereignty of the country’s laws above everything else.

This does not mean that attacks against Najib have ceased from this group. In the immediate aftermath of the verdict, Dr Mahathir seems to have upped his ante noting that there is “something rotten in the state of Malaysia”. In essence, he is suggesting that the Malaysian political system is in a state of decay. The falling oil prices, plunging commodity prices and soaring household debt, suggests dire straits ahead for Malaysia and Malaysians. Increased public sympathy for Anwar, internal opposition and a looming economic crisis have left doubts as to whether Najib can survive as Prime Minister of Malaysia. Najib’s survival currently hinges on whether any senior UMNO leader is willing to mount a challenge against his leadership.

Anwar Ibrahim’s imprisonment has far ranging consequences not only for the opposition and Malaysians, but also for the government. It could prove to be the Najib and UMNO Achilles heel.

Mohamed Nawab Mohamed Osman is assistant professor and coordinator of the Malaysia Program at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 February 2015, 7:20 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Justice and truth in Anwar’s case

Anwar did not have to prove his innocence; it was for the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

By
Gerard Lourdesamy
 | February 12, 2015

Free Malaysia Today

After 22 years at the Bar, I have never failed to be amazed by the development and exposition of the law by our superior courts. Their ingenuity and diligence ought to be commended. Their decisions deserve respect not least because of their consistency and predictability.

The judgment of the Federal Court in Anwar Ibrahim’s final appeal against his conviction for sodomy comes as no surprise to many of us.

The purpose of a criminal trial is to do justice. The role of the prosecutor is not to seek a conviction at all costs but to ensure that justice is done to both the victim and the accused. The process has to be fair and impartial. The golden thread that runs through our system of criminal justice is the presumption of innocence. The accused does not have to prove his innocence. It is for the prosecution to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The benefit of any doubt must be given to the accused. But the doubt must be a rational and not improbable doubt.

Consent is not required for a charge under Section 377A of the Penal Code, implying that this section deals with cases of consensual unnatural sex. Section 377C of the Code deals specifically with unnatural sex without consent and by implication it may involve some element of force or violence. That is why a heavier penalty is imposed by this section on offenders.

Anwar was charged under Section 377A read together with Section 377C. The complainant Saiful Bukhari swears that Anwar his employer had sodomized him on more than one occasion prior to the incident that was the subject of the charge. A form of lubricant was allegedly used on these occasions and it was the complainant who brought this lubricant for use during their sex acts. They worked in the same private office and spent much time together. Anwar bought expensive presents for his presumed lover and there was a great deal of affection between them. They both behaved normally despite their personal and intimate relationship that had gone on for some time.

But suddenly, the strident, handsome, well built six-footer felt ashamed for himself and his family, degraded and used by Anwar, and instead of going to the police or a rape counsellor, he chose to go and see a slew of politicians, including the then deputy prime minister and his wife, his former political secretary and a senior police officer. Is this the normal behaviour of a rape victim or someone who claims to have been sexually molested and assaulted by his employer? Do all victims of sexual offences in Malaysia have access to senior politicians at their homes?

Why did Saiful keep quiet for weeks or months about the alleged sexual assaults by Anwar? Why continue to work for Anwar despite the assaults? Why visit the deputy prime minister to complain about Anwar and then return to work for him knowing that he may be sexually assaulted again? Is it reasonable for Saiful to only become brave after meeting the deputy prime minister and then allow himself to be sexually assaulted by Anwar for one last time before going to the hospital and police for help? How do we know that Saiful was not a jilted lover, angry and dejected at being spurned by his boyfriend?

By any stretch of the imagination, Saiful cannot but be an accomplice. He was complicit in the alleged sexual acts and he never complained until after the last incident. And even then he remained for tea after the vicious attack and turned up for work the next day and even attended party functions. Is this the reasonable behaviour of a victim of a sexual crime?

Political idol

Anwar is charismatic, but one cannot be so naive to the point that even after being sexual assaulted repeatedly one can still remain in adulation and admiration of Anwar just because he is your political idol. This in itself is incredible if not implausible and our incredulity is compounded further by Saiful’s previous hatred for Anwar and the opposition. His sudden conversion as an acolyte of Anwar even surpasses that of Saul on the road to Damascus.

And yet he was found to be credible. Credibility is not determined by being consistent in a mechanical and methodical fashion. A witness can be coached to look and sound credible by experts in the art of court proceedings. Minute details derived from the sex acts may seem credible, but they can also be recalled with great precision and accuracy if one is subjected to a daily dose of unadulterated pornography. That is hardly the ring of truth, even less so if the sex was consensual. Most persons enjoy good sex. Therefore, their recollections of it can also be very detailed and convincing.

An objective and independent evaluation of the evidence would show that the sex was consensual and Saiful was nothing but an accomplice until the very end. The political conspiracy arose as a result of his mysterious supplications to the deputy prime minister and other important players for liberation from the sexual predator, Anwar. But the evidence that could have been obtained from these witnesses elicited under cross-examination was denied to Anwar by the trial judge on the grounds of relevance when these personalities successfully contested and set aside the subpoenas issued against them. How then do you expect the accused to prove the existence of the conspiracy to destroy him politically and socially if this opportunity was denied him? How does one substantiate an allegation if the opportunity is denied by the trial court? How then can one conclude that the dock statement was a mere denial?

Where was the corroborative evidence from the accomplice? In the Sodomy 1 appeal in 2004, the Federal Court acquitted Anwar because of the danger of convicting on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice despite believing that the sexual acts did take place.

To say that the Evidence Act 1950 does not require corroboration in sexual cases is akin to saying that all rape victims must be telling the truth even if they have an incentive to lie. Even if it is a rule of practice, the danger of not having corroborative evidence far outweighs the temptation to do justice to the victim simply on the evidence of the complainant alone.

Was the DNA obtained corroborative evidence? Why did the investigating officer seal the exhibits and then open the envelope to label the exhibits? The Inspector General’s Standard Operation Procedures stipulate that the exhibits be marked first before they are sealed. Why was the opposite done here? The credibility of the investigating officer himself was in doubt because of his slack and unprofessional handling of the evidence that contained the DNA.

Leaving the samples at room temperature in a safe in a hot and humid environment for such long hours was certainly not conducive to the preservation of the evidence. But why did he do it?

Tampering

Anything may be possible, but clearly the probability of tampering even in the slightest degree is sufficient to break the chain of control so as to render the evidence doubtful. This is not a fanciful presumption but a plausible conclusion.

If the sex was consensual the DNA evidence means nought. Because the DNA from the semen would still be present in the anus or mouth depending on which orifice was used during the sex act.

The benefit of the doubt must go to the accused and the burden never shifts to the accused to prove his innocence. Beyond a reasonable doubt means being sure, not in absolute certainty, but definitely not a high degree of probability. The latter implies a standard of proof slightly higher than on the balance of probabilities.

The evidence against Anwar was not overwhelming and neither was it conclusive to warrant conviction. The sentence was also manifestly excessive since the offence did not involve force or violence. Since 1957, only seven cases have been prosecuted for sodomy of which two involved Anwar. It is not a common crime, but like all sexual offences notoriously hard to prove. And yet in Anwar’s case the prosecution has succeeded against the odds, which itself is a testimony to the brilliance of the lead prosecutor who may aspire to be the Crown’s principal law officer in the near future.

The victim has rights, but so too does the accused. Human factors are involved that may justify or mitigate the conviction and sentence but the presumption of innocence and the imperative to do justice without fear or favour must permeate the decision making process.

Criticism of judicial decisions or the decision making process should not be equated with contempt or sedition even if robust, provided the comments are temperate, reasoned and justified. Respect for the courts and judges is the cornerstone of the rule of law and of any democratic society that propounds freedom and justice. But decision makers who take the seat of judgment must leave their prejudices, beliefs and self-interests behind, be accountable to God and their conscience and be open to public scrutiny and criticism. Only then can justice and truth prevail.

Gerard Lourdesamy is an FMT reader

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 February 2015, 1:59 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Life after Anwar

John Funston, Guest Contributor

New Mandala

12 February 2015

With Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim losing his appeal against sodomy charges and receiving a harsh five-year jail sentence, it could spell the end to his political career.

New Mandala spoke to Malaysia expert Dr John Funston, from the ANU College of Asia and the Pacific, about the trial and conviction, and what it means for Anwar’s, the opposition’s and the country’s political future.

NM: Now that he has been convicted, does this spell the end of Anwar Ibrahim’s political career? Why or why not?

JF: This conviction is likely to end 67-year old Anwar Ibrahim’s direct political role. It will now mean five years jail (40 months with remission for good behaviour), then five years after his release before he can contest political office.

But he will still be able to influence developments from prison, as he did during his previous six-year incarceration. He will also be a potent political symbol of government oppression.

Of course if the opposition were to win the next election – due by 2018, but can be called earlier – there may be ways to facilitate an earlier political return.

Can the opposition recover from a conviction for Anwar?

Some predictions are that his incarceration may in fact make opposition success in the next election more likely. But that is premised on the coalition holding together.

There is no one around with the status to bring them together, particularly as some leaders in the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) – notably party president Ustaz Hadi – are currently going off on one of their flirtations with extreme Islam, and even considering another alliance with the ruling UMNO party (it was part of Barisan Nasional from 1974-1978).

What does the future hold for Malaysia’s opposition and who do you think will likely succeed Anwar as leader if convicted? What are the merits and pitfalls of this?

Without Anwar being around uniting the conflicting policies and personalities, maintaining the opposition alliance will be extremely difficult.

Anwar’s wife Wan Azizah has acted in a similar role in the past, and is the most likely replacement. However PAS – particularly Hadi – recently opposed Wan Azizah becoming the Menteri Besar (head of government) of Selangor, so there is no certainty the party will accept this.

It is almost certain the candidate will have to be from PKR. The Democratic Action Party (DAP) is seen as too Chinese and PAS too Islamic/Malay. The current Selangor MB, Azmin Ali, is another possibility, though he already has a large task as the new head of Malaysia’s richest state.

Many have criticised the trial as being trumped up and an attempt to remove the government’s most potent opposition voice. What do you consider to be the motivation behind the trial?

Since 1998 Anwar has been seen as the major threat to the ruling UMNO party. On that score they are correct – election results in 2008 and 2013, saw the BN loose its two thirds majority (enabling it to amend the constitution at will) and then, in 2013, be out-polled in the popular vote by 50.9 per cent to 47.4 per cent.

All neutral observers agree that politics was the key consideration. Former defacto law minister Zaid Ibrahim has noted that since independence (1957) no one else has been charged for consensual homosexual activities.

John Malott, US Ambassador to Malaysia in 1998, has written of events at this time, quoting Najib’s close adviser Razak Baginda (now in exile following his involvement in the Altantuya case, which saw the murder of a Mongolian national) as telling an embassy official, “The decision has been made.

“They are going to ‘nuke’ Anwar politically for all time to come. Until he can never stand up again politically.”

Shortly after a senior member of Special Branch told an Embassy officer, “We are going to keep filing charge after charge after Anwar so he will be in jail for the next 100 years.”

How would you describe the general state of politics in Malaysia? Is democracy even less likely?

In September 2011 PM Najib announced a number of reforms that appeared to be moving in a more democratic direction, including ending a decades’ long state of emergency, amending several repressive laws, and repealing the notorious Internal Security Act and promising to do the same with the catch-all 1948 Sedition Act.

But replacement acts often had similar defects, and detention without trial for a period of two years was introduced in an October 2013 amendment to the Prevention of Crime Act, for individuals merely accused of “serious crimes.”

At the UMNO general assembly in November 2014, following an orchestrated ground-swell of claims that the Malay race was under a dire threat, Najib announced that he would not repeal the Sedition Act but actually strengthen it. In 2014 over 20 sedition cases were prosecuted or investigated, directed against members of the opposition, NGOs, journalists, lawyers and even legal academics.

In the wake of poor electoral results in 2008 and 2013 UMNO has fallen back on strengthening its rural Malay base. It is encouraging extreme demands by organisations such as Perkasa, Isma and Perkida, in an attempt to frighten Malays into fearing a non-Malay takeover.

In a development that bodes ill for democracy in Malaysia, it has focused on upholding the alleged ‘social contract’ in the constitution guaranteeing Malay ‘special privileges’, an Islamic state, and the absolute sovereignty of the Sultans – a quite inaccurate interpretation of the compromises included in the 1957 constitution.

Do you think his government is on the ropes?

It is probably an exaggeration to say the government is ‘on the ropes’.

The opposition has been deeply divided over recent months, mainly for reasons noted in regard to PAS above. PKR has also had serious internal divisions.

UMNO too is deeply divided, with former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir leading a formidable challenge to Najib, but no potential successor has yet emerged.

In addition, UMNO’s control of the state – including its finances, media, security arms, judiciary, Attorney-General, Election Commission etc – gives it enormous resources that can never be under estimated.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 February 2015, 7:08 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s political backslide

Editorial Board

Washington Post

February 11, 2015

SEVERAL YEARS ago it appeared that Malaysia, which has been ruled by the same party since it achieved independence in 1957, might be on the verge of a soft transition to democracy. Prime Minister Najib Razak promised to dismantle preferences favoring ethnic Malays, reduce police powers, repeal a repressive anti-sedition law and promote free and fair elections. He mostly stayed on course until 2013, when opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim led a multiethnic coalition to a popular-vote victory in national elections. The ruling United Malays National Organization clung to power only because of the gerrymandering of parliamentary seats.

Mr. Najib has since launched a campaign aimed at crippling the opposition — a crackdown that reached its peak Tuesday with the sentencing of Mr. Anwar to five years in prison. It was a major regression for a country that values its strategic partnership with the United States, and it was the continuation of a bad trend in Southeast Asia, following the military coup that toppled Thailand’s democratic government last year.

The criminal case used to imprison Mr. Anwar, who has been one of the foremost advocates of liberal democracy in the Muslim world, was as morally reprehensible as it was farcical. The opposition leader was charged with sodomy, which is still illegal in Malaysia but is rarely prosecuted. The 67-year-old married grandfather denied the charge, and the case against him was thin enough to be dismissed by a court in 2012. That Mr. Najib’s government managed to have that decision reversed by an appeals court and upheld by the Supreme Court demonstrated only that Malaysia still lacks an independent judiciary.

Mr. Najib has not limited his repression to Mr. Anwar. In recent months, dozens of activists have been charged under the same anti-sedition law that the prime minister promised to repeal. On Tuesday, police detained a famous cartoonist and announced that they were investigating two opposition members of Parliament because of tweets protesting Mr. Anwar’s conviction.

At the United Nations in September, President Obama decried such “relentless crackdowns” and promised “an even stronger campaign to defend democracy.” Sadly, the administration’s response to the Anwar conviction suggests the opposite. While saying that the United States was “deeply disappointed ” by the verdict and that it raised “serious concerns about rule of law,” a White House statement undercut those sentiments by affirming that “we remain committed to expanding our cooperation on shared economic and security challenges” with Malaysia.

Mr. Najib, who was invited to play golf with Mr. Obama in December, is unlikely to take the president’s “campaign to defend democracy” seriously unless it consists of more than such carefully balanced statements. One way to send a message would be to withhold the invitation to visit Washington that the prime minister is hoping for this year. A leader who has just jailed his main opponent should not be received at the White House.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 February 2015, 6:51 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar back in jail but problems mount for Najib

The Malaysian Insider

15 February 2015

The biggest political threat to the Malaysian government is behind bars after a court upheld a sodomy conviction for opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, but more thorny problems confront Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Anwar, jailed for five years on Tuesday on a charge he called politically motivated, has for years represented the greatest challenge to Najib’s coalition, which has ruled Malaysia since independence in 1957.

The bespectacled former finance minister and deputy prime minister cemented a three-party opposition alliance which took on the coalition at the last polls in 2013, costing the ruling bloc the popular vote in its worst-ever electoral performance.

Deserted at the polls by ethnic minority Chinese and urban voters, Najib’s party will now face the fallout of sharper polarisation over Anwar’s jailing, amid widespread perceptions that his prosecution was motivated by political vengeance.

“There’s something rotten about the whole thing,” said former cabinet minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim. “It’s not good for the country and democracy, never mind Najib.”

“Even to prosecute Anwar for these kind of affairs is just unreasonable, it carries such a heavy sentence,” he added.

The government denied interference in Anwar’s case.

While Anwar’s jailing could bolster Najib’s standing among hard-liners at home, foreign investors are likely to be alarmed at a time when Malaysia is facing sliding oil and gas revenues.

The United States was “deeply disappointed” with Anwar’s conviction, which “raised a number of serious concerns about rule of law and the fairness of the judicial system”, said US National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan.

But more damaging for Najib than foreign reproach over Anwar is likely to be criticism at home of his leadership, especially from within his own party.

“He has put the opposition challenge away for a couple more years, but his immediate problems are from internal critics and it will probably get worse,” said Ibrahim Suffian, the director of the Kuala Lumpur-based research firm Merdeka Center.

Unfortunately for Najib, his biggest critic is former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who led Malaysia for 22 years until 2003 and remains influential.

Najib is a self-described moderate who came to power with reformist plans. The more conservative Mahathir has made no bones about what he thinks of Najib’s premiership.

Last year, in a savagely critical blog post, Mahathir said he was withdrawing support from Najib. This month, Mahathir said there was “something rotten in the state of Malaysia” and openly questioned Najib’s handling of the country.

“If you don’t perform and people say you’re no good, please resign,” Mahathir told news portals.

“As for Najib, I don’t know if he is performing.”

Najib has quietly set aside his liberal agenda, dashing hopes for social reform and the scrapping of old security laws used to stifle dissent.

But it is not only Najib’s leadership that his critics have questioned. His personal life has come under scrutiny amid reports of his family’s lavish spending.

There is also suspicion of mismanagement at state investment firm 1 Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB). Najib is chair of its board of advisers. Concern over 1MDB’s US$11.6 billion (RM41.6 billion) of debt has pressured the ringgit and the country’s sovereign credit rating.

Now that Anwar is out of the picture, Najib’s detractors in the ruling party could set their sights on him, analysts and government insiders say.

“Anwar’s exit is quite a big risk for Najib,” said Wan Saiful Wan Jan from the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs.

“Umno leaders will be more vocal about Najib’s flaws,” he said, referring to the ethnic Malay party at the heart of the ruling coalition.

A source close to the government said Anwar’s jailing was “not in the prime minister’s domestic or international interests”.

Malaysia next election must be held by 2018 and sympathy for Anwar could stoke support for the opposition.

“This is a silver lining for the party in a way… it’s Pakatan’s opportunity to show they can function without Anwar,” said Wan Saiful, referring to the diverse Pakatan Rakyat alliance.

Anwar’s politician daughter, Nurul Izzah, said the opposition must stay united.

“We have no chance if we do not present a cohesive union,” she said.

“Everyone has to step up. This is not Anwar Ibrahim’s personal quest. He has been attacked for 17 years because we got together to challenge the government.” – Reuters, February 15, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 8:22 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Barisan once dangled DPM post if Anwar ditched Pakatan, says Nurul Izzah

by Looi Sue-Chern

The Malaysian Insider

15 February 2015

Barisan Nasional (BN) once offered the deputy prime minister’s post to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim if he abandoned Pakatan Rakyat (PR) which had won 52% of the popular vote in 2013, his daughter said last night.

PKR vice-president and Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar told a ceramah in Penang that the offer was made during post-election reconciliatory talks.

“He was told to ignore PKR’s allies, PAS and DAP. Accept the offer, form a government… ‘que sera sera’ (whatever will be, will be), ‘kita bergembira bersama-sama’ (we be happy together).

“What decision did he make? He rejected the offer to the end because it dealt with the life and death of our struggles. As a coalition, we can only work together as long as it is based on principles,” she said at the ceramah in the Seberang Jaya expo site in Permatang Pauh where Anwar is the MP.

The ceramah was held to pay tribute to Anwar, who is jailed in the Sungai Buloh prison after the Federal Court rejected the PKR de facto leader’s appeal against his sodomy conviction and five-year jail sentence last Tuesday.

Nurul Izzah told the crowd of about 1,000 people that Anwar agreed to negotiate when Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak pressed for reconciliation after the 13th general election.

She said her father set conditions that there must be efforts to tackle corruption in the federal government and address economic issues among others, but the talks eventually broke down.

Nurul Izzah earlier said the reason her father had to be jailed was because he was the main challenge to BN leaders after he led PR to a bigger victory of 52% of the popular votes in GE13.

She said she and her siblings were proud to be Anwar’s children because they knew he at least was not corrupt, never abused power or oppressed the people, and he would stand and fight with the people.

She also described her father as a fighter who would never surrender to political intimidation.

Her mother, PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, told the people about Anwar’s condition since he was jailed on Tuesday.

“I was very upset seeing him like that during our 45-minute visit. He tried to cheer us up, telling us he was all right.

“He is in a cell with no bed, just a one-inch thick mattress. There are no chairs and no tables. He did not complain but he suffers from back pain so it would be difficult for him.

“If possible, for his health, give him a bed. We are not asking for VIP treatment… he is a political prisoner. Because of politics, he suffers such disgrace. That saddens me,” she said.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, who also spoke at the ceramah, extended support for Anwar and Dr Wan Azizah, and urge the people to help PR retain the Permatang Pauh federal seat when a by-election is called. Anwar will lose the seat in two weeks unless he gets a royal pardon.

He said PR still believed that Anwar was the future prime minister of Malaysia, and asked the people to be the “court that would give justice to Anwar”.

The Penang chief minister said BN and Umno were only trying to use other issues to divert the people’s attention from problems with the economy.

“If Anwar is still out here with us, he would surely be standing in the forefront to fight the implementation of the GST (goods and services tax),” he said.

PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu paid tribute to Anwar, describing him as a rare specimen due to his courage.

Anwar, he said, was known for his courage from his student leader days, to the years he rose to power as a minister, fell from grace and became the opposition leader.

“Despite the power he had enjoyed, he could still return and fight together with the people as a common citizen.

“He could have just left the country but he chose to stay and face the system and now he is in jail. It is rare to find such a man,” said the politician, who is better known as Mat Sabu.

The ceramah also heard leaders pay tribute to the late PAS spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, who died on Thursday night.

Lim said Nik Aziz’s spirit must be kept alive in PR’s struggles while Mat Sabu said the dead leader was well respected because he led by example and was always humble.

Mat Sabu said Nik Aziz was never famous for being a crowd puller but he was an ‘ulama’ (cleric) who practised what he preached.

“He was not famous for his knowledge either. He did not have a PhD like others but he was known for his virtue and the good examples he demonstrated.

“When he became the Kelantan menteri besar, he continued to live in his old house and led a humble life. This is what you do when you are in power.”

Although PR had lost both leaders, Mat Sabu vowed to make sure the opposition coalition would stay together and fight until they made it to Putrajaya.

PKR Youth deputy chief Dr Afif Bahardin also announced the party’s “March to Freedom” postcards at the ceramah.

The public who want to send messages of encouragement to Anwar could write on the postcards and mail them to Sungai Buloh prison. – February 15, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 8:33 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on rational and moderate Malaysians to give Cabinet a third and final chance to do what is right on the Ismail Sabri affair – to get Ismail to retract and apologise for his racist statement or be removed from Cabinet

I call on moderate and rational Malaysians to give the Cabinet a third and final chance to do what is right on the Ismail Sabri affair – to get Ismail to retract and apologise for his racist statement calling on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses or be removed from Cabinet.

Malaysians of good sense and goodwill, regardless of race, religion or even political affiliation, are tired of the cant and hypocrisy of the Ismail Sabri affair – to the extent that it is no more an issue affecting the Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Minister, but the quality and morality  as well as the credibility and integrity of the entire 35-Minister Cabinet and the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

The 35-Minister Cabinet seemed to be very committed in wanting to prove former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathr Mohamad and former Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin right that it is “half-past six” Cabinet with “deadwood” Ministers – for the Ismail Sabri affair has proved beyond a shadow of doubt that we have the most dim-witted and dishonest Cabinet in the nation’s 58-year old history.

How sad and gloomy for Malaysians when Vision 2020  is just five years away and those who had high hopes of the plural Malaysian society achieving its greatness as a nation of diverse races, religions, languages and culture where the people are united with a common purpose to build a world-class educational, economic, environmental and political system  that could be an example and  inspiration to the world, both Islamic and non-Islamic – especially at a time when Malaysia is expected to play a greater role in the international stage as a non-permanent member of the Security Council and Chairman of ASEAN.

It is not worth wasting any more time or arguments to try to convince Ismail Sabri that his cant and hypocrisy is completely unacceptable and intolerable  to right-thinking Malaysians, claiming that he does not regret or apologise for his racist statement calling on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses, but only regret that his statement had taken a racial slant and been viewed as an ethnic issue.

In other words, everybody else is wrong, except him!

I do not think Ismail Sabri could convince primary school students with such illogic and ridiculous arguments.

Ismail should just be written off as a sane, sound and moderate political leader  as he insists that there is nothing wrong with his racist fulminations and the wrong was on those who had objected to his rabid racialism.

If on Wednesday’s third Cabinet meeting since Ismail’s rabid racialist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses, Ismail is not prepared to retract and apologise for his racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses, I agree the country should move on – not to forget about the subject, but to demand full explanation from the all the other Cabinet Ministers, whether UMNO, MCA, MIC, Gerakan or the Sabah and Sarawak BN component parties,   and the Prime Minister to explain how they could sanction, condone and defend Ismail’s rabid racialism.

It is no more an issue just concerning Ismail Sabri, but the credibility and integrity, as well as the quality and morality, of the entire Cabinet and the political parties headed by the Ministers.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 9:44 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia without Anwar Ibrahim

Gwynne Dyer

Straight.com

February 13th, 2015

Does democracy in Malaysia really depend on Anwar Ibrahim? If it does, Malaysia’s 30 million people are in trouble.

Anwar is back in jail: at least five years’ imprisonment, and another five years’ ban from political activity after that.

He says he doesn’t care: “Whether it’s five years or 10 it doesn’t matter to me anymore. They can give me 20 years. I don’t give a damn.”

But of course he cares. By the time he’s free to resume his role as opposition leader, he’ll be at least 77. The People’s Alliance, the three-party opposition coalition that he created, can’t afford to wait 10 years for him to be free. The real question is whether they can stay together without him as leader.

Malaysia is formally a democracy, but the same coalition of parties, the National Front, has won every election since 1957. In the 2008 and 2013 elections, however, Anwar’s coalition began to cut seriously into the National Front vote. Indeed, in 2013 the People’s Alliance actually got a majority of the votes cast, although the ruling coalition still won more seats in parliament.

But last Monday (February 9), the Federal Court ruled that Anwar was guilty on a charge of sodomy (which is illegal in this Muslim-majority country) and sent him to jail. He had previously been acquitted of the charge, and many people in Malaysia suspect that the prosecutor appealed the case to move it up into the superior courts, which are more open to political influence than the lower courts. In other words, they’re getting him out of the way.

The first time Anwar was charged with sodomy was in 1998, less than a month after he was fired as deputy prime minister. He had risen to the country’s second highest political post with startling speed thanks to the support of long-ruling prime minister Mahathir bin Mohamad, but then he fell out with Mahathir (according to his own account) because of the latter’s lavish use of public funds to bail out the failing businesses of his children and cronies.

In any case, it was certainly in the ruling party’s interest to silence him. No need to kill him, though; jail would keep him just as quiet. Many Malaysians believed from the start that the sodomy charge was politically motivated.

Anwar was convicted (on extremely contradictory evidence), and sentenced to nine years in prison. But he was released in only five years, after the Court of Appeal overturned his conviction in 2004—and immediately began trying to unite the opposition parties and create a coalition capable of challenging the National Front government that he had once served.

The People’s Alliance was successful enough in the 2008 election to frighten the government, and by the strangest coincidence a second charge of sodomy was brought against Anwar only a couple of months later. Once again the “evidence” was flimsy and contradictory, and on this occasion the man who claimed to have been “seduced” had actually met with Prime Minister Najib Razak (of the National Front) two days before he laid the charges.

The second sodomy case lasted four years, but Anwar was acquitted in 2012 on the grounds (as the judge said) that “The court is always reluctant to convict on sexual offences without corroborative evidence.” But the prosecutor immediately appealed the verdict, and last Monday Anwar was found guilty again.

The Federal Court judge said that the evidence against him was “overwhelming”, although it was exactly the same evidence that the lower court judge had dismissed as tainted and unreliable.

Anwar is back in jail, and everybody in Malaysia is wondering what this will do to the hitherto unstoppable rise of the People’s Alliance.

The People’s Alliance is a curious coalition of two secular parties that want to end the system that makes invidious distinctions between citizens who belong to different ethnic and religious groups, and an Islamist party that wants to create an “Islamic state” in a country where only 60 percent of the population is Muslim. Anwar managed to hold these parties together, but the government clearly believes that without him they will fall apart.

Barely half of the people in Malaysia are actually Malays. Most of the rest are descended from Chinese and Indian immigrants who arrived in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the non-Malay population is doing much better economically than the original population. Most of the non-Malays are also non–Muslim, so the Malay population feels both exploited and threatened.

Ever since the horrendous race riots in 1969, therefore, the political system has been skewed to give Malays special advantages in education, government jobs, and various other areas. That naturally creates other resentments and other problems, and the People’s Alliance (or at least most of it) wants to end those special privileges. But doing that would be both tricky and risky.

If the People’s Alliance does not hold together without Anwar Ibrahim, all chance of ending the National Front’s seemingly perpetual rule will be lost. With it would be lost all hope of moving this complex country beyond the ethnic and sectarian divisions that have allowed the National Front to rack up 13 consecutive election victories.

Nevertheless, that may be what happens. In the real world, cunning and ruthlessness often beat idealism and enthusiasm.

Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 8:10 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s dark side

Banyan

Economist

Feb 14th 2015

The jailing of Anwar Ibrahim is a setback for the whole country, not just the opposition

AFTER taking an inexplicable four months to make up its mind, Malaysia’s highest court on February 10th came up with the verdict its critics said had been scripted for it all along. It rejected an appeal by Anwar Ibrahim, the opposition leader, against his conviction on a charge of sodomy—of having sex in 2008 with a young man who had worked for him. It upheld the five-year jail sentence imposed last March. Since a prison term also entails a five-year ban after release from running for political office, this would rule Mr Anwar out of the next two general elections. And since he is 67, it might mark the end of his political career.

The three-party coalition he heads, Pakatan Rakyat, poses the most serious threat the United Malays National Organisation, UMNO, has faced in its nearly six decades of continuous rule. But the opposition depends heavily on Mr Anwar’s leadership, so his sentence sounds like good news for the prime minister, Najib Razak. Celebration, however, would be short-sighted.

Having Mr Anwar out of the way certainly offers political benefits to the government. In the general election in 2013, when he led the Pakatan campaign, it won more of the popular vote than the UMNO-dominated coalition, Barisan Nasional (BN), though, thanks to gerrymandered constituencies, it won only 40% of parliamentary seats. Yet Pakatan is an unlikely and fractious coalition. One of its members is a conservative Islamist party, appealing to the ethnic-Malay, Muslim majority; another represents mainly the ethnic-Chinese minority; Mr Anwar himself heads a multiracial, secular party. An important factor in keeping these elements together has been Mr Anwar himself.

A former deputy prime minister, he fell out with his mentor, Mahathir Mohamad, during the Asian financial crisis in 1998, and emerged as the leading advocate of reformasi—fundamental reform of an ossified, corrupt political system. He is by far the opposition’s best-known and most charismatic figure, despite—indeed, in part because of—his six years in jail for alleged corruption and on an earlier charge of sodomy (later overturned).

His latest conviction, however, is a mixed blessing for the government. It insists the judiciary is independent, and points out that, in this case, the charges were brought by the alleged sexual partner. But conspiracy theorists—a category including virtually every observer of Malaysian politics—will interpret Mr Anwar’s legal travails as politically motivated. After the verdict, he spoke to the judges: “In bowing to the dictates of your political masters, you have become partners in the murder of the judiciary…You chose to remain on the dark side.” They walked out, but Mr Anwar’s supporters at home will think he did no more than state the obvious. Even abroad, where Malaysia is often praised as a model of Muslim-majority democratic moderation, many will be suspicious. Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch (HRW), a monitoring group, called the verdict a “travesty of justice”.

Critics point to many curious aspects of the case. According to research cited by HRW, the law under which Mr Anwar has been convicted has been invoked only seven times since 1938. Mr Anwar was acquitted of this charge in 2012 because DNA evidence had been mishandled, only for the government’s prosecutor to appeal against the decision. So, unfairly or not, the case has harmed the image of Malaysia’s judiciary, and, to the extent that he is seen as implicated in its decisions, of Mr Najib himself.

Already his reputation as a liberal and moderate has been dented by his government’s use of another archaic and draconian law, on sedition, to hound its critics. They include a political cartoonist known as Zunar who was arrested this week, apparently for a tweet critical of the verdict on Mr Anwar. Having promised to repeal the sedition law, Mr Najib in November said it would actually be strengthened. That was seen as a concession to conservatives within UMNO. They present a far greater immediate threat to Mr Najib than does the opposition, especially since they have the support of Dr Mahathir. He vacated the prime minister’s office in 2003 and is now 89, but remains a powerful political force. He has turned against Mr Najib, as he did against his predecessor, Abdullah Badawi—and indeed Mr Anwar before that.

With Mr Anwar behind bars, UMNO hardliners will have less reason to worry about the opposition, and can concentrate their fire on Mr Najib’s leadership. They have been handed a weapon in the troubles surrounding 1MDB, a sovereign-wealth fund, whose board of advisers Mr Najib chairs. It is behind on debt repayments and accused of a woeful lack of transparency. This week a group of Malaysian banks was reported to have threatened it with being called into default if payment is not made this month. Politicians from both the opposition and UMNO have called for investigations into 1MBD. Its troubles might even have an impact on Malaysia’s standing as a sovereign borrower. Last month Fitch, a ratings agency, called it a “source of uncertainty”.

Chameleon karma

Under attack from his own right flank, Mr Najib has little room to make good his promises of political liberalisation. Even economic reforms—where he has a respectable record of, for example, widening the tax base and cutting fuel subsidies—may stall. The most difficult ones require the ending of Malaysia’s rules mandating commercial discrimination in favour of the Malay majority, a system to which many in UMNO are wedded.

So the BN, whose ethnic-Chinese and ethnic-Indian components fared disastrously in 2013, risks becoming a mere shell for an UMNO ever more beholden to Malay-nationalist forces, thus further sharpening a dangerous racial polarisation in Malaysian politics. Mr Anwar, a political chameleon whose real beliefs are sometimes hard to pin down, has many critics, but he could at least credibly lead a coalition that bridges Malaysia’s ethnic divides. That is why his incarceration is a dark day not just for Malaysia’s opposition, but for Mr Najib and the country itself.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 7:48 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


No hope for justice, says teary Wan Azizah

By Susan Loone

Malaysiakini

Feb 15, 2015

There was silence and sadness in the air as Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail said between tears, “I never thought I would go through this ordeal again”.

Addressing more than 1,000 supporters in Seberang Jaya last night, Azizah said she has lost weight since her husband Anwar Ibrahim was sentenced to five years jail for sodomy on Tuesday.

The PKR president apologised for being rather emotional in her speech at the ‘Freedom of the People’ ceramah organised by the Penang government to honour Anwar, the Permatang Pauh MP.

“But here I am, tested again. Never mind, I am willing but this does not mean that I can accept it,” she said

Accompanying Azizah at the event were Pakatan top leaders including Chief Minister and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng (left) and several state executive councillors.

PAS deputy chief Mohamed Sabu and Anwar’s eldest daughter, Pantai Dalam MP Nurul Izzah earlier spoke at the three hour event.

Azizah said she felt most sad when Malaysians do not realise that Anwar is not a criminal, but a political prisoner persecuted for his political beliefs and struggles. To her, Federal Court judges are supposed to be highly respected, but there appears to be no hope for justice when the five unanimously agreed to jail Anwar.

“Why can’t Malaysians see this fact? That there is no hope for justice or defence in Malaysian courts.  This is what makes me sad,” she cried.

“I’m not saying this because he is my hubby or he is the Opposition leader or a former deputy prime minister but because (like all of us) he is a human being,” she said.

During her six-minute speech, Azizah thanked the Permatang Pauh people for standing by her family throughout all these years.

She said Permatang Pauh remains the place where Anwar’s struggles began and the seat has an “important” place in her heart.

She denied that she was on a roadshow to gain sympathy from the people, but merely wanted to share her family’s experiences.

“Let Anwar’s imprisonment raise awareness among Malaysians. We can pray, it is the least we can do to show we oppose such injustice.

“Please pass this message to those who are not here tonight and don’t stop supporting the struggle,” she added.

Anwar’s family is on the ‘March to Freedom’ campaign led by second daughter Nurul Nuha (right), who was not at the ceramah last night.

Last night, Azizah also launched the ‘Send a Postcard’ campaign to Anwar in Sungai Buloh.

Anwar is expected to lose his Permatang Pauh seat on Feb 24, unless he seeks a pardon from the Yang diPertuan Agong.

Anwar served the constituency since 1982 under the BN ticket, before he was sentenced for six years (1999 to 2004) for abuse of power related to his sodomy case.

During that time, Azizah held the seat as MP, resigning in 2008, to allow Anwar to return to active politics.

In the 2013 national polls, Anwar poised himself as Pakatan’s choice as prime minister and garnered 52 percent of the popular vote although the coalition failed to seize Putrajaya.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 8:47 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The book “Tragic Orphans – Indians in Malaysia” eloquent testimony of the failure of Vision 2020 of a Bangsa Malaysia

Dr. Carl Vadivella Belle’s new book “Tragic Orphans – Indians in Malaysia” is timely as it is the most eloquent testimony of the failure of Vision 2020 of a Bangsa Malaysia.

In 1991, Vision 2020 spelt out nine strategic challenges which must be overcome if Vision 2020 of a fully developed nation is to be achieved  – “a united nation, with a confident Malaysian society, infused by strong moral and ethical values –  living in a society that is democratic, liberal and tolerant, caring, economically just and equitable, progressive and prosperous, and in full possession of an economy that is competitive, dynamic, robust and resilient”.

2020 is only five years away. What are the prospects of achieving the Vision 2020 of a fully developed nation?

In actual fact, we cannot even pass the first of these nine strategic challenges, which is “establishing a united Malaysian nation with a sense of common and shared destiny. This must be a nation at peace with itself territorially and ethnically integrated, living in harmony and full and fair partnership made up of one ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ with political loyalty and dedication to the nation”.

Can anyone remember when was the last time the Prime Minister or  any Minister had talked about “Bangsa Malaysia”?  The term “Bangsa Malaysia” has become a dirty term or unsanctioned aspiration.

Are we moving closer to the objective of a united Malaysia nation “with a sense of common and shared destiny”, “a nation at peace with itself… ethnically integrated living in harmony in full and fair partnership?

The opposite is in fact taking place with extremism, bigotry and intolerance rearing their ugly heads, aggravating both racial and religious polarisation in the country in recent years and threatening the very fabric of unity and harmony of a plural society.

Today, former Prime Minister Tun Abdullah was moved to urge leaders to take a  firm stand against extremists and reminding them that they cannot be “wishy-washy” about the matter.

Expressing sadness that extremist voices were growing louder, he said:

“The rabble-rousers, sabre-rattlers and bigots seem to be having a louder voice in politics and in the media. I do not think we are becoming less moderate.

“Perhaps, the extremists in our society are becoming louder and therein lies the danger.

“The political leadership has to take a firm stand against those espousing extreme views. We cannot be wishy-washy about it.”

Tunku Sharifah Menjelara Hussein, the granddaughter of the founding Prime Minister of Malayia, Tunku Abdul Rahman, also said today that Tunku would not have compromised with racism and would have put a stop to the racial politics in the country if he were still alive.

I wish to correct Carl who said just now that in Malaysia, debate is shaped by race.  It t is even worse than that, for debate in Malaysia is  distorted by race – by issues which have nothing to do with ethnicity.

The best example is the Ismail Sabri episode – where he claimed that there was nothing wrong in his call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses, but in the “racially-slanted reaction” to his call. In other words, there was nothing wrong with his original statement and everything wrong to the “racist” reactions to his call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese consumers.

The marvel is not Ismail’s insolence and arrogance in putting the blame of the Ismail Sabri episode on everybody else but himself, but that we have a Cabinet and a Prime Minister who could be bamboozled or coerced to accept such an outrageous and hypocritical justification.

I have been asking around among Malaysian Indians as to what they regard as the biggest problem faced by Indians in the country today.

Various answers have been offered, but high on the list is  “Indian gangsterism”, which has become worse over the years, whether in the number of Indians involved; the dominance of Indians among the gangster population, criminals and the prisons; the infiltration into national secondary schools to haunt and hound the Indian students  but also in the increasingly reckless and inhuman atrocities committed by the Indian gangsters against their victims – bearing comparison with the atrocities like chopping of limbs and beheadings now being committed by Islamic State.

The micro problem of Indian gangsterism is the result of the macro-problem of long-stand marginalisation of the Indian community over the decades which is in fact the greatest indictment of the Barisan Nasional nation-building policies of the past few decades.

Why have Indians in Malaysia ended up as “Tragic Orphans” – a fate afflicting not only their forefathers but increasingly the present generation as well.

Why do Indians feel alienated and marginalised?

Yesterday, I came another tragic tale of marginalisation and alienation of Malaysians.

I met someone who is returning to Malaysia for the Chinese New Year. This person worked in the Singapore office of Microsoft, which has some 400 workers, with 80 per cent of them Malaysians.

I cry for Malaysia why we cannot ensure that there is a place for our talented people in the country, who do not have to go overseas to seek an employment and remuneration commensurate with their training and talents?

Malaysian Indians’ historic contributions to the present-day Malaysia cannot be denied whether in plantation economy or infrastructure development in roads and railways.

There is also no scarcity of great Malaysian Indians who have distinguished  themselves as Malaysian giants in various spheres of national endevavour, such as:

In Politics

Karpal Singh

V David

P Patto

Penang Deputy Chief Minister P. Ramasamy

Dr. Raj Kumar

Tun Sambanthan

Tan Sri Athi Nahappan

Seenivasagam brothers

Law/Judiciary/public services

R. Ramani – Malaysian Ambassador to UN/ President of UN Security Council

Tan Sri Edgar Joseph Jr (Federal Court Judge)

Tan Sri V C George (Court of Appeal judge)

Datuk Mahadev Shankar (Court of Appeal judge)

Tan Sri Visu Sinnadurai (High Court judge/Dean of Law FacultyO)

Datuk Param Cumaraswamy

Datuk Ambiga Sreenivasan

Tan Sri Rama Iyer

Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam

Medicine and academia

Prof. T Danaraj

Prof S. Arasaratnam

Jomo Sundram

Letters and Journalism

Athi Kumanan – Makkal  Osai

Janaki Raman

Trade Unions/ social activists

P.P. Narayan

Mrs. R. Bhupalan

Irene Fernandez

Sports

Dr. Mani Jegathasan

Punch Gunalan

M. Rajmani – sportswoman of the year

With such an illustrious list among Malaysians Indians who have rendered patriotic services (which is incomplete), how can anyone doubt the love, loyalty, commitment and patriotism of Malaysian Indians to Malaysia?

This  makes an even larger number of Malaysians Indians ending up as “tragic orphans” after more than half a century of nationhood a real great national scandal!

In fact, we have reached a situation where there are not only   large numbers of Malaysian Indians finding themselves as “tragic orphans” in  Malaysia, their plight  also applies to large numbers of  Malays, Chinese, Kadazans, Ibans and Orang Asli in Malaysia – with more and more evidence that 45 years of New Economic Policy have led to even greater intra-ethnic inequality than inter-ethnic inequality.

There is an urgent need for a National Reconciliation regardless of  race, religions or political beliefs, to save Malaysia from becoming a “failed state”, and one such principle must to ensure  that no Malaysian ends up as a “tragic orphan” in Malaysia.

DAP is prepared to take part in this process of National Reconciliation involving political parties and the civil society – and the first thing that must be done in this National Reconciliation is to immediately free Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim from his five year jail sentence in Sungai Buloh prison.

(Speech at the lunch talk by Dr. Carl Vadivella Belle, on his new book “Tragic Orphans – Indians in Malaysia” held at Kanna Curry House, Petaling Jaya on Sunday, 14th February 2015 at 2 pm)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 15 February 2015, 6:04 pm and is filed under
Indians
,
Malaysian Dream
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Federal Court’s 5-0 conviction of Anwar for Sodomy II lost in two higher courts – the court of opinion in Malaysia and the court of international opinion worldwide

The Federal Court’s 5-0 conviction of Anwar Ibrahim for Sodomy II on Tuesday, February 10, has lost in two higher courts – the court of opinion in Malaysia and the court of international opinion worldwide.

Tonight’s capacity-crowd turnout and the pain and sorrow felt by Malaysians in the past five days at the Federal Court’s dismissal of Anwar’s appeal and upholding the five-year jail sentence on the 67-year Parliamentary Opposition Leader are proof that Malaysians generally do not find any credibility in the the Federal Court’s verdict.

In the international court of opinion, Malaysia had been in the dock in the past week.

Malaysians should feel proud as Malaysians this year with the country starting its term as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and Chairman of ASEAN, after a year when Malaysians dared not identify themselves in foreign countries that they were Malaysians because of the still-inexplicable disappearance catastrophe of MH 370 jetliner with 339 passengers and crew from 15 nations onboard, although we are less than a month from its ill-fated first anniversary.

In fact, this is the first time that  the new generation of Malaysians had felt so small with the universal condemnation of the Federal Court decision, whether by the governments of United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Germany,  Switzerland (which declared that it would raise Anwar’s jailing at the next meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva) and  the European Union, or by international legal, parliamentary  and human rights organizations  like the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights, LAWASIA and the Law Council of Australia or by the world press like Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and the Economist.

Malaysians are therefore not alone in their rejection of the Federal Court decision to dismiss Anwar’s appeal and to jail him for five years, as international  condemnation of the Federal Court verdict  is  loud and clear on the world stage.

Anwar’s third incarceration forms a trio of cases in Malaysia where there is the most blatant and flagrant travesty of justice, the other two being the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu and the killing of DAP aide Teoh Beng Hock on July 16, 2009.

I am still  astounded that the “twitter” Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar has yet to launch  a thorough and wide-ranging inquiry to ascertain why two police commandos Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar of the elite police squad, the Special Action Unit (UTK), tasked with protecting people’s lives, had murdered in cold blood defenceless Altantuya Shaariibuu, blowing up her body in a jungle clearing with C4 explosives on Oct. 19, 2006, although  their murder trial had ended with their conviction and death sentence.

The question that is inevitably asked inside the country and all over the world is who could be behind the two Bukit Aman Special Action Squad (UTK) cops’ C4 murder of Altantuya.

Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar had holed up in  Australia in the past month, refusing to return to Malaysia to face the gallows.

Who can blame Sirul for refusing to return to Malaysia for his death sentence to be executed, if he had acted, however mistakenly,  not as a “rogue policeman” but in the  highest interest of the state on the instructions of his “patrons”.

The case of Teoh Beng Hock, who was alleged to have committed suicide and  jumped off the 14th floor of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission headquarters in Shah Alam on 16th July 2009 continues to cry out for justice – for he was clearly killed as there was no reason for him to commit suicide.

In July last year, our “twitter” Inspector-General of Police  announced that the police will investigate me for “sedition” for my comment on the fifth death anniversary of Teoh Beng Hock (TBH) that Beng Hock had been murdered and that the killers were  still at large.

It was fortunate that in September, the Court of Appeal agreed with me in its ruling that Teoh Beng Hock’s death was caused by persons or persons unknown, or I would have been hauled to court to face a  “sedition” trial.

What can ordinary Malaysian do to seek justice in the Anwar Ibrahim case?

In fact, the fate of Anwar Ibrahim is now in the hands of ordinary Malaysians.

Although the highest court in the land have pronounced “guilty” and the five-year jail sentence on Anwar, the highest power in the land which practices parliamentary democracy are still the voters in the form of People Power.

If Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, political affiliation or region, are united to end the travesty of justice in the Anwar case, it is still open to them to free Anwar earlier from jail and to restore his civic rights, including fulfilling his destiny as the Prime Minister of Malaysia, through a clear-cut decision  in the 14th General Election to vote out the UMNO/BN Federal Government in Putrajaya.

(Speech at the inaugural DAP SSS (Support, Sympathy and Solidarity) with Anwar Ibrahim ceramah at Dewan Orang Ramai, Taman Cheras Jaya, Selangor on Sunday, 15th February 2015 at 10 pm)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 February 2015, 7:11 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s worst week ever for credibility and integrity of the administration of justice in the country

The past week starting with the Federal Court’s dismissal of Anwar Ibrahim’s Sodomy II appeal on Tuesday 10th February is likely to be the country’s worst week ever for credibility and integrity of the administration of justice in Malaysia.

The Federal Court’s 5-0 unanimous decision to dismiss Anwar’s appeal has come as a great surprise, even to those who had never entertained high hopes that Anwar could get off unscathed in his latest encounter with selective and even malicious prosecution.

But even the most pessimistic had expected either a 3-2 verdict or at worst a 4-1 decision, but  everybody was floored by a unanimous 5-0 judgment.

What further stumped the legal and judicial fraternity, as well as the general public, was that there was only judgment  by the Chief Justice, Tun Arifin Zakaria, when the public expectation was  more than one judgment, even five judgments!

It will not be  easy to find another Federal Court judgment in the past two decades which had met with such instant universal condemnation, not only inside the country but outside – by foreign governments like United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Germany,  Switzerland (which declared that it would raise Anwar’s jailing at the next meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva), the European Union; international legal, parliamentary human rights organisations like the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights, LAWASIA and the Law Council of Australia and international press like Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and the Economist.

But the greatest disservice to the credibility and integrity of the administration of justice, and in particular whether there is true independence of judiciary and just rule of law, came from the Prime Minister’s in 109 words in three-paragraph statement on Feb. 10, which said:

“The judges will have reached their verdict only after considering all the evidence in a balanced and objective manner.  Malaysia has an independent judiciary, and there have been many rulings against senior government servants.

“The police report against Anwar Ibrahim was brought by a private individual – Anwar’s employee and personal assistant – not by the government.  As the victim of a sexual assault, he had every right to have his case heard in court.

“In this case, exhaustive and comprehensive due process has been followed over many years. That process is now complete, and we call on all the parties involved to respect the legal process and the judgment.”

Even the worst enemies of the country could not have conceived of an ultra weapon like the 109-word three-paragraph Prime Minister’s Office statement to discredit the administration of justice, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in Malaysia.

The 109-word three-paragraph Prime Minister’s Office Statement not only peddled false notions and baseless assumptions about the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, but worst of all, it punctured the myth about the presence a truly independent judiciary and the just rule of law in Malaysia.

The PMO office statement issued before the completion of the “exhaustive and comprehensive due process” in Anwar’s Sodomy II trial is in fact the  “smoking gun” of Executive violation of the doctrine of separation of powers and interference with the judicial independence and the rule of law.

A judgment from  the highest court of the land must be able to stand or fall on its inherent logic and cogency and superiority in its reasoning and arguments, but when the Executive had to be called in to shore up support as calling on Malaysians to “respect the legal process and the judgment”, there is indeed something very rotten with administration of justice in the country!

It is not only the decision of the Federal Court and the integrity of the judiciary which came under intense scrutiny and criticism, the senior lawyer who became Prosecutor under fiat, Tan Sri Muhamad Shafee Abdullah and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail were also subjected to severe criticisms.

Former attorney-general Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman called for Shafee’s fiat as public prosecutor to be be revoked, especially after Shafee’s continued attacks on Anwar Ibrahim after the Opposition’s conviction and sentencing.

Abu Talib said Shafee’s disparaging remarks about Anwar after the case was settled was most inappropriate and merely lend credence to the perception that Anwar’s case was politically motivated.

Shafee is only bringing the office of Public Prosecutor into disrepute when he reacted to criticisms of former Bar Council chairman Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan by suggesting  that she be charged with contempt of court for criticising the judiciary’s decision on Anwar’s case.

Will Shafee next suggest that Malaysia break diplomatic relations with countries which are highly critical about the Federal Court decision on Anwar’s case and declare principal officials of international organisations like ICJ, IPU, Amnesty International which continue to be highly critical of the Federal Court’s decision on Anwar as persona non grata?

Today, there is a call for the Attorney-General Gani Patail to be sacked for abusing his powers by “hiding” an Order to Investigate (OTI) on Shafee and continuing to appoint the latter as a prosecutor in Anwar’s Sodomy II trial.

Former Kuala Lumpur CID chief Mat Zain Ibrahim had  filed a police report on Feb 7, three days before Anwar’s conviction, urging Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak to exercise his authority over Gani.

Mat Zain said Najib should set up a tribunal to impeach Gani from the AG’s post

as  Gani continued to appoint Shafee to head the prosecuting team for Anwar’s Sodomy II appeal, despite the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) itself having signed the OTI dated Jan 3, 2014.

Mat Zain said that he only found out about the OTI on May 19, 2014, when the police called him to Putrajaya to have his statement recorded in relation to three police reports he made on Dec 15, 18 and 26, 2013.

Mat Zain’s allegations are serious and cannot be ignored by the Prime Minister.

The idiom “It never rains, but it pours” is appropriate to describe the plight of the administration of justice, particularly with regard to whether there is true independence of judiciary and just rule of law in Malaysia.

Will there continue to be inelegant silence from the Prime Minister on the national and international crisis of confidence of the Malaysian judiciary and rule of law?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 February 2015, 4:50 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


UMNO/BN may stay out of Chempaka by-election in Kelantan to create disunity and distrust among Pakatan Rakyat parties while going all out in the Permatang Pauh parliamentary by-election

With the five-year jail sentence for Anwar Ibrahim upheld by the Federal Court on the day of infamy of February 10, 2015 (Tuesday), and the passing of Tok Guru Nik Aziz on Thursday night, two by-elections for the parliamentary seat of Permatang Pauh and the Kelantan State Assembly seat of Chempaka are shaping  up.

However, the UMNO leadership is already orchestrating a new plot to  try to further  undermine Pakatan Rakyat and foment disunity and distrust among the PR parties through the ploy of  UMNO/BN staying out of the Chempaka by-election in Kelantan while going all out in the Permatang Pauh parliamentary by-election.

UMNO leaders like the Umno Kelantan Chairman Datuk Mustapa Mohamad, the UMNO Youth leader Khairy Jamaluddin and even the Gerakan President Datuk Mah Siew Keong have been given the “green light” to sound out in public the proposal that UMNO/BN should stay out of the Chempaka by-election, giving all sorts of grand-sounding reasons to camouflage the political design behind such a move.

As I said at the luncheon talk for Dr. Carl Vadivella Belle’s new book “Tragic Orphans – Indians in Malaysia” earlier today, there  is an urgent need for a National Reconciliation process regardless of  race, religion or political belief, to save Malaysia from becoming a “failed state”, and ensure that  no Malaysian end up as a  “tragic orphan” in Malaysia in order to  counter the rise of extremism, bigotry and intolerance in our society.

Malaysia needs sincerity, honesty, moderation and commitment among our leaders to unite Malaysians in a common cause to develop Malaysia’s great potentials and human talents and not cheap political tricks trying to divide and destabilize Pakatan Rakyat like UMNO staying out of the Chempaka by-election while going all out in the Permatang Pauh by-election.

In the spirit of national reconciliation to pave the way for the coming together of all Malaysians for a common national cause, regardless of race, religion and politics, UMNO/BN should  be consistent and stay out of both Chempaka state assembly by-election in Kelantan and the Permatang Pauh parliamentary by-election.

I have no doubt that UMNO/BN strategists are burning midnight oil to plan new plots to try to bring about the disintegration of Pakatan Rakyat.

We cannot and should not  hide the fact that PR is afflicted with our  greatest crisis since our formation seven years ago, even more challenging than the first crisis PR faced in September 2011, which nearly led to the end of PR.

PR can only sustain and succeed if we adhere to the  two fundamental principles which had been the secrets of the PR success in its first  six years – strict adherence  to the PR Common Policy Framework which had formed the bedrock common principles of the three component parties in the coalition, and the operational principle of consensus regarding the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council as the highest policy-making body for PR.

If we stay loyal to  these two fundamental principles, PR will be able to grow from strength to strength to fulfill the hopes of generations of Malaysians for change and Malaysia’s rendezvous with greatness.

For this reason,  when I was in Alor Star on Thursday morning, I proposed a eight-year commitment by the three PR component parties to continue to uphold these two fundamental principles of PR common policy framework and the operational consensus mechanism, and to put aside whatever differences we have for the next eight years, as we had done in the first six  years – a Eight-Year Road Map for Pakatan Rakyat.

The eight years is derived from three years to the 14GE from now  and the five years after the 14GE, as PR must make a commitment to Malaysians as to the policies we are committed to implement in the five years in government  if PR achieve power in Putrajaya after the 14GE.

If the PR component parties of DAP, PKR and PAS  are prepared to make this eight-year commitment to forge a common struggle, and to put aside all issues not in consonance with the PR Common Policy Framework and the consensus principle,  we would have found the formula to ensure that Pakatan Rakyat is poised for a serious bid for Putrajaya to fulfil the hopes and aspirations of Malaysians for change for the better for the people and nation.

It is most regrettable that I did not have the opportunity to discuss this Eight-Year Pakatan Rakyat Road Map with Nik Aziz as he passed way the same night.

However, I have no doubt that Nik Aziz would not  only have given his blessing but his full support, as he is undoubtedly one of the architects of Pakatan Rakyat, without whom Pakatan Rakyat would not have achieved the good results in the 2008 and 2013 General Elections.

It is now for all PR leaders to strive to save Pakatan Rakyat from disunity and disintegration, which will be the greatest tributes to both Anwar and Nik Aziz for their life-long struggle  and commitment for justice, freedom, human dignity and national unity.

[Speech (2) at the inaugural DAP SSS (Support, Sympathy and Solidarity) with Anwar Ibrahim ceramah at Dewan Orang Ramai, Taman Cheras Jaya, Selangor on Sunday, 15th February 2015 at 10 pm]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 16 February 2015, 8:17 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.