1988 Judicial Crisis - "Let Right Be Done"

Ambiga Sreenevasan, the president of the Malaysian Bar, recently launched the report prepared by a panel of eminent persons to review the 1998 judicial crisis.

The panel concluded that the removal of the Lord President, Tun Salleh, and the two Supreme Court judges, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Seah were unjustified and unconstitutional. The following are extracts from her speech and from the report itself which is available here.

Launch of the Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons to Review the 1988 Judicial Crisis in Malaysia There are many who take the view that the events of 1988 should be left in the past and that we should move forward. However, we believe that a process of truth and reconciliation is critical before we can move forward, as the injustices committed in 1988 cannot be left unresolved and unacknowledged in our history. We believe that this is an essential first step in the process of judicial reform. The purpose of this review must therefore be made clear. We need to learn valuable lessons in order that history does not repeat itself. As George Santayana once said, “Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.” We seek no punishment. We seek a correction of the record that now stands against these innocent Judges. We seek closure for these respected Judges. We seek closure for our nation. We would further like to state for the record that although three Judges were ultimately dismissed, six Judges suffered in all. Six Judges were suspended. The three who were ultimately reinstated suffered during their suspension and even when they were reinstated. They were never given due recognition for their flawless years of service on the Bench. Some were potential Lords President or Chief Justices but these positions eluded them. Needless to say, the Judges who were removed paid a heavy price for acting in accordance with their consciences. These Judges acted with courage in upholding the Rule of Law in the face of much adversity. ... I understand that this report is possibly the first of its kind ever to be written. I wish to thank the participating organisations – International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute represented by Tuan Haji Sulaiman Abdullah; LAWASIA, represented by Mr Mah Weng Kwai, the President; and Transparency International-Malaysia, represented by Richard Yeoh and today by its President, Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam – for sharing our vision and ideals. They did not hesitate for one moment when we invited them to participate. We are all proud to be associated with this endeavour. I wish to end by saying that, for all those who have faced injustices and continue to face injustices, “Let Right Be Done”. ...source

Extracts from Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons to Review the 1988 Judicial Crisis in Malaysia ... 23.1 On a review of the findings and the reports of the First and the Second Tribunals, and on consideration of the definition and meaning of ‘judicial misbehaviour’ as above, this Panel has arrived at the conclusion that the composition of the Tribunals, the process adopted by them, and the findings and conclusions arrived at against the Lord President, Tun Salleh, and the two Supreme Court judges, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Seah, as well as their recommendation for removal of the Lord President and the two judges, were not justified or otherwise appropriate in the circumstances of the two cases. 23.2 Accordingly, the removal of the Lord President, Tun Salleh, and the two Supreme Court judges, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Seah from their offices was unconstitutional and non est. ...source

DNA rush

Malaysia Debates DNA Bill With Eye On Anwar Case Monday, 18 August 2008 - Malaysia Today (By SEAN YOONG/ AP) Malaysia's government on Monday (18 Aug) proposed a law that would make it mandatory for criminal suspects to provide DNA samples _ a move that critics claim is meant to bolster a sodomy charge against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar introduced the DNA Identification Bill in Parliament, but denied the government was targeting Anwar, who has refused to give police a DNA swab in an investigation into an accusation that he sodomized a male aide. "There is no political motive," Syed Hamid told reporters. "I think it is ridiculous that (the opposition) looks at everything as having a political motive." Anwar, who is contesting an 26 Aug by-election for a Parliament seat and wants to topple the government by mid-September, was charged with sodomy earlier this month _ the second time in a decade he has faced the accusation _ and faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted. Anwar says authorities might tamper with his DNA sample to implicate him in the case. Police have dismissed his concern and pledged a fair investigation. Parliament must debate the DNA bill before it can be passed, a virtual certainty because government lawmakers comprise a majority. It must also be approved by the Senate and the king. Syed Hamid said officials began drafting the bill in 2001, but did not say when the government expects the law to take effect. Under the proposed law, suspects can be jailed for a year if they refuse to provide DNA. Opposition lawmaker Tony Pua noted the bill was the first to be proposed in Parliament when it reconvened Monday after a monthlong break, raising questions about why it was "so important that it has to be rushed into Parliament at this time." "Are laws being changed just to ensure a successful upcoming prosecution of some prominent personality? Are goal posts being shifted against the natural course of justice?" Pua said. The sodomy accusation by Anwar's 23-year-old former aide, Saiful Bukhari Azlan, was a bombshell for Anwar's three-party opposition alliance, which won an unprecedented 82 seats in the 222-member Parliament in March elections. Anwar, 61, has rejected the accusation as a ploy to prevent him from carrying out his threat to engineer defections by government lawmakers to oust Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's administration by next month. Abdullah has denied any conspiracy. Abdullah said Saiful's accusations should not be taken lightly. "We must remember that he could be a victim," Abdullah was quoted as saying Sunday by the New Straits Times newspaper. "We tend to overlook small people like him who seek justice." Anwar, a former deputy prime minister, claims police also fabricated evidence against him in 1998 when he was charged with sodomizing his family driver. Malaysia's highest court overturned the sodomy conviction in 2004. ...source http://malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/11534/84/

The 1988 Judiciary Crisis (Video)

Revisiting the '88 judiciary crisis 13 Aug, 2008 - Malaysiakini Videos Two decades have passed since the 1988 judiciary crisis. But the effects still linger. The phrase 'judiciary crisis of 1988' is generally understood as relating to the suspension and sacking of Supreme Court judges including the then Lord President Salleh Abas.

(courtesy of Malaysiakini)

To defend Malaysian democracy

To defend Anwar is to defend Malaysian democracy By Sandra Day O’Connor and Abdurrahman Wahid August 7 2008 - Financial Times We know Anwar Ibrahim well and have the highest regard for him. For that reason, we are very concerned about recent developments in Malaysia that seem aimed at defaming him and threatening him with imprisonment in a manner reminiscent of the campaign to defame him in 1998. The power to prosecute is one of the most awesome powers of the state. Without proper checks and balances it can easily be abused by those in power to humiliate and discredit innocent people. Even when the injustice is corrected, its victims are often left with their reputations permanently damaged. In Malaysia, the power to prosecute is being used to try to discredit Mr Anwar, the remarkable leader of the opposition, victim of a similar attack 10 years ago. If this effort were to succeed it would be a tragedy for Mr Anwar personally, for the people of Malaysia and for the world. In 1974 Mr Anwar was jailed for 20 months, under Malaysia’s notorious internal security act, for leading demonstrations against rural poverty. Invited later to join the government, he rose to become Malaysia’s finance minister in 1991. His performance was recognised internationally. As deputy prime minister he was admired for his commitment to accountability and good governance. Many Malaysians wanted him to replace Mahathir Mohamad, the aging prime minister. Poised to lead the nation towards greater transparency and the rule of law, his agenda for reform was clearly perceived as a threat by some. In 1998, as he was on the brink of succeeding Mr Mahathir, he was unjustly accused of sodomy and corruption, beaten in jail and convicted in a trial that was marked by coerced testimony, fabricated evidence and serious lapses in judicial integrity. He spent six years in solitary confinement before being released, in part through the wisdom of Mahathir’s successor as prime minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Since then Mr Anwar has made a remarkable political comeback, thanks in no small measure to his wife, Wan Azizah, who led his party while he was banned from political activity and took it to success in Malaysia’s elections in March. With the ban on Mr Anwar lifted from April 14, it looked as if he had a chance to mount a serious challenge to the government and possibly emerge as the next prime minister. Last Thursday, Wan Azizah resigned her seat and Mr Anwar announced that he would run to fill it. However, his enemies are fighting back, filing new sodomy charges . We find it impossible to believe these charges. We know Anwar as a man of integrity. We appreciate the way he has spoken on behalf of freedom, democracy and human rights. The charges are inconsistent with everything we know about his character. At the same time, there are plausible motives for some to manufacture a false case against him. Mr Anwar last year brought evidence to a royal commission that enabled it to conclude that there had been improper influence exerted on judicial appointments. More recently he announced that he had evidence against the current attorney-general and the current inspector-general of police for the perversion of justice in his own prosecution in 1998-99. A few days ago it was disclosed that the doctor who first examined the alleged victim found no physical evidence to support the most recent accusation. The Malaysian authorities need to recognise that there is no way that continued pursuit of these charges can be viewed as credible, given the history of prosecutorial abuse and manipulation of evidence in the earlier proceeding against Anwar. His political future should be decided at the polls, not through some suspect prosecutorial proceeding. We are deeply concerned that the safety, freedom and reputation of an important leader in the Muslim world are at risk. So, too, is the integrity of Malaysia’s judicial system and along with it the credibility of the government in general. The future of Malaysia as an example of success for the developing world and for the entire Muslim world may be at stake. We hope Mr Abdullah, who showed wisdom earlier in facilitating Anwar’s release from prison, will manage to drop the charges against Mr Anwar and in so doing serve the interests of justice for the people of Malaysia and for all the people of the world. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor is a former justice of the US Supreme Court and Abdurrahman Wahid is former president of Indonesia ...source

The calm before the storm

The calm before the storm - again Neil Khor Aug 8, 2008 - Malaysiakini Letters Many Malaysians are shocked that Anwar Ibrahim is being charged with having ‘committed a sexual act against the order of nature’. On the one hand, there is a small number who will believe anything that the government tells them. Similarly, there are those who disbelieve everything that comes out of the mainstream media. MCPX Then there is the rest of us. Malaysians who have to weigh the facts before making up our minds. I am reminded of the situation in Penang in the recent general elections. There is now a strange calm throughout the whole country, the same calm before the last electoral tsunami. Malaysians are now making up their minds. It may be that those in power are so divorced from us that they do not realise that the ground has shifted. For some people, those who have for years benefitted from a very strong BN government, it is almost reflex action to disregard the average Malaysian. As a friend asked in exasperation: ‘Do they think we are blind?’ Actually, we simply do not figure in their minds. For too long, leaders have acted without much care for public opinion. They do not even realise that their high-handed antics are being watched and will be remembered especially when Malaysians go to the voting booth. Malaysians will never be able to forget this latest tribulation faced by fellow citizen Anwar Ibrahim. There are several reasons why the Anwar Ibrahim case will be unforgettable. In fact, it will mark a historical watershed in modern Malaysian history. It will be on par with the murder of JWW Birch in 1875 and will be as life-changing as the assassination of Henry Gurney in 1951. Firstly, depending on the outcome of the trial, the Malaysian judiciary will be irrevocably affected. It might either be an opportunity to regain public confidence or finish any respect the public has for the judiciary. If the latter happens, we might be entering a new chapter in our national history. We will become a society where citizens no longer respect law and order. Secondly, this is the second time Malaysia is being tried by the media. We are fast losing our case in the court of public opinion. Malaysia's good name overseas, so tirelessly crafted by our first class diplomats in the 1960s and 1970s, will now be irrevocably damaged. The picture is no better inside the country. The government is facing a crisis of confidence. If in 1998, the anti-Anwar feeling was quite palpable as Anwar was still mistrusted for his deeds in the education ministry, this time round Anwar is seen as the champion of multi-ethnic Malaysia. Furthermore, in 1998, the Internet was only at a nascent stage in its development. Today, most Malaysians get their information from the Net. In this digital world, it is quite difficult for any one party to dominate or stuff the ‘truth’ down anyone's throat. Sadly for the government, in the court of public opinion it has lost the credibility game. It has not been able to create a sense of ambivalence so well crafted by Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 1998. In the midst of a global economic crisis, Mahathir was a pillar of strength. Malaysians were conflicted and many in the urban areas continued to support the BN because it demonstrated dynamic handling of the economic crisis. The present government has not shown such dynamism. Instead, it leaves behind a trail of ‘flip-flop’ policies. Malaysians are now asking whether the country has enough resources to cushion this indecisive government. Whilst it was unthinkable after March 8, there is now a developing sense of urgency that this recently elected government should go. Thirdly, this is a landmark case for it is exposing how archaic and outdated some of laws can be. Crafted in the Victorian Age, this piece of law was repealed in the West decades ago. In the face of scientific evidence, even Singapore's conservative patriarch came out to say that homosexuality is a genetic condition. But, more importantly, that such laws have been used to prosecute Anwar Ibrahim a second time is really quite amazing. That in a consensual situation, only one party is being prosecuted is evidence of political motivation. The combination of all these reasons will immortalise the name of Anwar Ibrahim in our history books. Perhaps, these books will not be written in the immediate future but it is already written into the minds of many Malaysians. The name Anwar Ibrahim now evokes sympathy, courage, bravery and integrity. It will be a long day's journey into night but a new dawn will eventually come. ...source

Drop Political Charges - Human Rights Watch

Malaysia: Drop Political Charges Against Opposition Leader Police Investigation of Anwar Ibrahim Lacks Credibility Human Rights Watch (New York, August 7, 2008) – The Malaysian government should immediately withdraw politically motivated charges against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Human Rights Watch said today. Police served Anwar, who is running for office, with an order to appear in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on August 7, 2008, under a colonial-era law that criminalizes homosexual conduct. But several instances of misconduct around the investigation into allegations that Anwar had sexual relations with a male former aide show the charges are aimed at preventing Anwar from leading a new government. Police handled the inquiry improperly, while government officials interfered in it and tried to publicly intimidate and embarrass Anwar. On August 26, Anwar is due to run in a by-election for the constituency vacated on July 31 by his wife, Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail. On August 6, police ordered him to appear in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court to face charges under section 377 of Malaysia’s criminal code, which criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.” “The Malaysian government appears to be manipulating the legal system to shore up support for its continued rule and undermine the opposition,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This case is really about preventing challenges to the government’s rule.” There is no legal impediment to Anwar’s running in the by-election, but denial of bail would prevent him from campaigning. Although a “sodomy charge” is a non-bailable offense, common practice has been for bail to be granted. Given Anwar’s high public profile, Human Rights Watch said that bail should be granted, as there is no evidence that he is a flight risk or will intimidate the complainant or any witnesses. The police investigation into the allegations against Anwar, who was arrested on July 18 and interrogated about the accusations, has lacked transparency and impartiality. Police refused to publicly release the first information report filed by the complainant, Saiful Bukhari, as required under Malaysian law. This has fuelled suspicions that the document may have been altered after Anwar’s arrest. Even more damaging to the credibility of the police investigation and the Malaysian government has been their response to a medical report by the first doctor to examine Saiful. The report of an anal examination conducted by a doctor at Hospital Pusrawi, and leaked on the internet on July 29, found no evidence of “sodomy.” Kamaruddin Ahmad, the hospital’s medical director, verified the report as authentic, but said the doctor who examined Saiful was a general practitioner, not a specialist, and that the examination was not “sodomy-related.” Deputy Inspector General of Police Ismail Omar dismissed the report’s relevance, describing it “as an attempt to sabotage police investigations” and confuse the public. Ismail also told reporters that police are considering investigating news sources that leaked the medical report. “The authorities seem more concerned with investigating how the medical report was leaked than with the fact that its content doesn’t support the criminal charges,” said Adams. The government of Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi has faced serious challenges from opposition parties since the national election in March 2008 in which the ruling Barisan Nasional (National Front) lost its two-thirds majority in the parliament and control of five states. Public opinion polls in Malaysia indicate little support for the prosecution of Anwar. An opinion poll released on August 1 by the Merdeka Center for Opinion Research found only 11 percent believed the sodomy allegations, while two-thirds believed the charges are politically motivated. Only a third expressed confidence that institutions such as the judiciary, the police and the attorney-general’s office would perform their roles in Anwar’s case in a fair and transparent manner. “The charges leveled against Anwar provide the government a convenient distraction from current political crises,” said Adams. “Pursuing this case will only undermine the credibility of the police, the prosecutor and the government.” The sodomy charges were filed under an antiquated law, a holdover from British colonial rule, that criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature,” both consensual and non-consensual. Human Rights Watch opposes all laws used to criminalize consensual homosexual conduct between adults, and urged the Malaysian authorities to repeal those provisions while replacing those on non-consensual sexual acts with a modern, gender-neutral law on rape. Anwar’s previous trials in 1999 and 2000 on corruption and sodomy charges raised serious concerns about judicial independence and fairness. The courts refused bail, prevented Anwar from raising certain defenses, disallowed witnesses from testifying, and improperly threatened defense lawyers with contempt proceedings. Then-Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir even went on television during the trial to declare Anwar guilty. If the charges are not dropped, trial proceedings should be fair and public, and conducted by an independent, impartial and competent court that meets international due process standards, Human Rights Watch said. This includes selecting the judge at random according to the standard practice in Malaysia. There should be no shadow of suspicion that the selection of the judge was fixed, as in the previous trials. ...source

Rule of whose law?

Breaking the rule of whose law? Yusmadi Yusoff 07 August 2008 - Malaysia Today AUG 7 — We have been incessantly reminded by government leaders that we should abide by the law. That, in order for justice to prevail, we should uphold the rule of law. The Prime Minister again reminded us that we should be fair and that the law must allow a complainant to seek legitimate redress. The Prime Minister cautioned the public to "remember" that there is a valid complaint by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to be entertained. That it was, after all, done in accordance with the dictates of the law. That, again, any public outcry against the charges framed against Anwar is unnecessary and would jeopardise peace and order in society. As we moved into another series of the Anwar Ibrahim trials, reminiscent of the 1998 saga, we have again been given legal tutelage by government ministers. It is assumed that as long as the process involves the court of law, justice would prevail. It is also assumed that a charge can only be framed in the face of credible evidence, as weighed by the institutions of justice. These are the assumptions thrown about in the mainstream media on a daily basis, so that the people understand and appreciate that the fair game of justice is at work. We have been made to understand that we should let the law take its course. Lady Justice, holding the balancing scales, would forever be blinded from prejudices and would decide without fear or favour. The assumption is only theoretically correct, lest we forget that even justice can be a game, with willing pawns, charting its own rules for its own needs. The free use of the terms "rule of law" and "due process" as a means to justify action by politicians demands serious examination. As simple as it sounds, "rule of law" in fact reflects a serious concept which has often been misused and its philosophical and jurisprudential considerations largely ignored. First and foremost, rule of law does not equate to mere application of rule by law, regardless of the substance of the law invoked. Throughout history, laws have constantly been challenged for elements of discrimination and oppression. Hence, even the substance of the law must be examined before the application of the law can be accepted. Secondly, rule of law, even at its most minimal level, demands the application of the law to be devoid of external influences, especially governmental influence and that the institution adjudicating the laws ought to be free from corruption. External influences create ripples of instability, which may grow and endanger the order and legal certainty that is assumed with the rule of law. Rule of law shares an extremely intimate relationship with the other dimensions of a democratic government. In the truest form, it demands an independent judiciary, political rights, civil liberties and mechanisms of accountability to ensure that it remains true to form. Thirdly, we have to understand that rule of law rests on the pillar of democracy. In a society where the word of the minister is often quoted to be the gospel truth, we need to urgently step back and recall Thomas Paine's warning that "in absolute governments, the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King and there ought to be no other". Before parading the rule of law to diplomats and the media, as constantly exercised by Home Minister Datuk Syed Hamid Albar, we have to first honestly answer if we have been a free country in our practice of the law. We are hard pressed to honestly answer if we have been a country which protects, strengthens and empowers the agents of the rule of law. Democracy, protection of human rights and protection from bureaucratic caprice and corruption certainly cannot be divorced from the discussion with regards to the rule of law. Any attempt to do so means that the rules which have been promulgated exist within a system which is known only to autocratic despots and German Nazis. The notion that rule of law is an automated system which guarantees justice cannot be true when the substance of the law and its agents are constantly questioned even by the very people governed by the system. Serious doubts and questions were asked by the Bar Council and the public, mainly through the alternative media, on the veracity of the charges made in the police report. Yet, the questions posed were replied by affording denials, almost evasive if one were to recall the media statements made by Hospital Pusrawi on the medical report of Saiful Bukhari. The call by the Prime Minister himself for Anwar to "deliver" his DNA to the authorities is another incident which smacks of legal and scientific ignorance. The public demanded answers and obtained denials. They may have been "answers" but in fact, they created further questions and undoubtedly fuelled further speculation. More damaging, the "rule of law" as practised in Malaysia, now hangs precariously for the whole world to see. The controversial trials of Norita Samsudin and Datuk Norjan Khan and, lately, of Altantuya Shariibuu certainly beg the question of whether the rule of law is in place. In the eyes of the public, the institutions of justice have not "delivered" up to expectations. The lack of public confidence automatically means the lack of "legitimacy". In short, the rule of law cannot exist in the true sense when it is administered by a questionable system. The philosophy of punishment is deterrence. Yet, there would be none should the delivery mechanism be tainted with abuse and doubted by the people it serves. Rule of law demands categorical commitment to democracy and basic protection of human rights. Anything less means that we are not entitled to invoke it as a tool to justify action. The rights of not one but all citizens are at risk without a vigorous application of a truly democratic rule of law. Often quoting or misquoting the "rule of law" in order to justify questionable action in the face of glaring questions is a retrogressive and an unabashed embrace of Machiavellian politics — that the end justifies the means. Getulio Vargas, the former Brazilian President, was reported to have said: "For my friends, everything, for my enemies the law." Such is the power of the law. Yusmadi Yusoff is the Parti Keadilan Rakyat MP for Balik Pulau and currently a Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University, the United States. ...source

Doctor's Report and SD

What the IGP and AG do not know......yet 7 August 2008 - Malaysia Today THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Today, 7 August 2008, the government is going to charge Anwar Ibrahim for the alleged crime of sodomy. What they do not know yet is that we have a few surprises in store for them. One of them is the documents below. They will most probably deny Anwar bail just so that they can keep him in jail the entire duration of the trial. These documents, however, prove that there is no case against Anwar and the police are trying to build a case around fabricated evidence. ...more

Malaysia Sodomised III

Anwar Arrest Expected Thursday Jed Yoong 06 August 2008 - Asia Sentinel Police say they will arrest Malaysia’s opposition leader on sexual perversion charges Malaysian police today served notice that Anwar Ibrahim will be charged and arrested tomorrow for sodomy, which is punishable by up to 20 years in jail. No bail is allowed for the offense, meaning the opposition leader will likely be jailed until he is tried at some still-undetermined time. The charges are widely viewed by human rights activists and others as engineered to end Anwar’s attempt to take power after a decade in the political wilderness following his conviction on a similar charge in 1999. That charge was overturned by Malaysia’s courts as flawed after he had spent six years in prison. The leader of the opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat, or People's Alliance, Anwar called a press conference to proclaim his innocence and accused Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and other leaders of the United Malays National Organisation of a political conspiracy. "Tomorrow I will be charged with a crime I did not commit," Anwar said in a statement. "The real criminals will, in their efforts to humiliate me and to derail the people's aspirations for transformational change in Malaysia, hide behind a smokescreen created by the government-controlled mainstream media." Anwar charged that the attorney general had advised against charging him after studying the results of the investigation. Saiful Azlan Bukhari, 23, a onetime volunteer in Anwar's office, reported to police on June 28 that Anwar had forcibly sodomized him in an apartment in Kuala Lumpur. Since that time, however, a medical report has surfaced by a physician at Hospital Pusrawi, where Saiful first went to be examined, saying he had found no evidence of tearing or scarring that would indicate forcible rape. The doctor subsequently was questioned by police and has since gone into hiding. The hospital issued a statement saying the report was made after Saiful had complained of an upset stomach, although the report clearly stated the doctor had examined him for evidence of sodomy, found none, and sent him to a government hospital for another examination. ‘ A local political news site, Malaysia Today, also reported on July 30 that Saiful had allegedly met with Senior Assistant Commissioner II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof in a room at the Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. The article, written by the site’s editor Raja Petra Kamarudin, also claimed that "prior to this secret meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke on the phone at least eight (8) times." Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has also acknowledged meeting Saiful before the police report was made. Najib said Saiful had gone to see him for advice on scholarship matters. Earlier, the deputy prime minister denied that he had ever met the university dropout. Anwar announced on July 31 that he would contest a Penang parliamentary seat which is being vacated by his wife Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, who also leads the biggest parliamentary opposition party, Parti Keadilan Rakyat. The Election Commission announced Wednesday that nomination and polling days for the by election have been set for August 16 and 26 respectively, giving a 10-day campaign period. In the March 8 general election, the ruling Barisan Nasional, a coalition of three ethnic parties, lost its two-thirds parliamentary majority and control of five states, including two of the most important, Selangor and Penang, which contribute about 30 percent of gross domestic product. Since then, the coalition has been wracked by mass defections at the branch level in Penang and Selangor. Anwar has threatened to take over the federal parliament on September 16 if he wins the by-election, predicting that as many as 30 lawmakers will join the opposition. The Barisan has 141 members of parliament against Pakatan's 80 and one independent. Opposition leaders expressed disappointment at the threatened arrest. Lim Kit Siang, the leader of the Democratic Action Party, the Chinese-based party which is part of Pakatan, wrote in his blog: "When news goes out to the nation and the world tomorrow of Anwar’s Sodomy II charge, it will be a sad and black day for Malaysia as it will be a clear and unmistakable signal that Malaysia has not dissociated from its recent dark past, where laws were used to suppress dissent and legitimate political and democratic challenge rather than to build a united, just, progressive and prosperous Malaysia." Nasharuddin Mat Isa, deputy president of Parti Se-Islam Malaysia, the dominant Malay party in Pakatan, told Asia Sentinel in a phone interview: "It's unfair that there is already a media trial. We should let the rule of law prevail and allow the case to be decided by the courts." Tian Chua, Keadilan’s information chief, told Asia Sentinel in a phone interview: "It's very clear that this (the sodomy allegation) is being used to jeopardize the coming by-election. So far, I think this law (Section 377) has only been used for Anwar. This law is ridiculous!" Political analysts contacted by Asia Sentinel questioned the timing of the charge, saying that it will fuel the perception that the government acted to jeopardize the by-election. "I don't believe (Anwar) has done it,” said Stanley Koh, the former head of research and planning for the Malaysian Chinese Association, the second largest ethnic party in the Barisan. “It's so obvious. You have to look at the sequence of events leading up to the charge. It's like a movie, a serial that from day one made according to some political agenda. But I don't think this would jeopardize the by-election because public perception against the government is at an all time low and nobody believes the charges (according to a survey by the Merdeka Centre)." "At the first level, public perception may be that the timing seems to be impeccable for UMNO's sake,” said Tricia Yeoh, director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies. “As public perception towards UMNO is at a low level, (the charge) will fuel suspicion that it is coming when the by-election is taking place. At the second level, there is the question of whether the by-election will continue as it is as some are speculating that the actual flow of the nomination process will be affected. In addition, what the public will be seeing is the charge is in reaction to the by-election but it may be the other way around that the by-election may be a reaction the imminent charge." ...source

Malaysia Sodomised II

Malicious Mindset and Perverted Priorities August 3rd, 2008 - Bakri Musa The continuing furor over a college dropout’s allegation that he had been sodomized reveals the malicious mindset and perverted priorities of the Abdullah Administration. It is also a gross perversion of justice. Those who would have Anwar swear by the Quran and voluntarily donate his DNA to the police, whose reputation is only slightly less soiled than the criminals they apprehend, have it backwards. It is the norm of the civilized world that one is innocent till found guilty; it is for the state to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt. I can excuse law-illiterate Abdullah for not appreciating such nuances, but for his law-trained ministers like Rais Yatim and Syed Hamid not to know that is reprehensible. They are breaching their profession’s ethics and ideals. Besides, since when has our Quran been debased to a lie detector? If only the truth could thus be readily sought, we would not need expensive forensic investigations! Such naiveté! What with the economic challenges, endemic corruption, and rampant crime in the country, our leaders’ voyeuristic obsession on this alleged male-on-male khalwat represents gross misuse of scarce state resources, a flagrant perversion of priorities. Perverted Priorities In this 21st Century, a charge of sodomy sounds so, well, medieval! To think that in Malaysia today that ‘crime’ carries a 20-year prison term! Perhaps some diligent law student could tell us the last time there was a sodomy trial in Malaysia. I am not counting the 1998 case against Anwar Ibrahim that was subsequently overturned on appeal. That was nothing more than a crude political maneuver to smear and silence the former Deputy Prime Minister. The glaringly shoddy forensic investigation and amateurish prosecution did not in the least embarrass the authorities. Nonetheless, in the process Anwar suffered that infamous black eye, the result of being senselessly beaten while in custody by no less than the Chief of Police. The country however suffered an even more damaging black eye, figuratively speaking, from that sorry episode. Many countries have repealed their sodomy laws making it no longer a crime. Even prudish Singapore reduced the penalty to a maximum of only two years, a far cry from Malaysia’s 20! Such an enlightened attitude does not mean that society treats lightly or refuses to acknowledge male-on-male sexual assaults. Many jurisdictions have removed the gender specificity to the crime of rape, meaning it can be perpetrated by man on man. It would not surprise me that, like everything else, the Malaysian penal code has yet to be updated to recognize this new reality. Unlike rape, which requires the legal determination of lack of consent, sodomy does not have that statutory burden. Enough that sperms (or any tissue) other than that of Saiful’s were found in his anus, a fact that could be established through forensic examination. That overrides the “he says, she says” (or in this case, ‘he’) argument. The authorities’ long delay following completion of the forensic examination signals something sinister. In the context of modern criminal law, what the young man is alleging is that he had been raped. Of course in conservative Muslim Malaysia, a rape charge does not quite have the same devastating political impact as that of sodomy. Indeed, in UMNO’s upcoming party elections one of the candidates for Vice-President was once accused of raping an underage girl. This sodomy investigation is less the seeking of justice for a ‘soiled’ pretty boy, as Abdullah would like us to believe, more an orchestrated political exercise in character assassination. The recent public opinion polls confirm this. Meanwhile there are two statutory declarations linking Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak and his wife Rosmah to the brutal murder of a Mongolian model, a translator in the scandalous multibillion dollar submarine deal with France. By whatever measure, the viciousness of the crime or the personalities implicated, these other two allegations are considerably more serious. You would not know that from the reactions (or lack thereof) of the officials. This sodomy allegation has been commented upon by ministers, senior officials, and Members of Parliament. Don’t they have substantive matters to worry about? Even science-illiterate Abdullah has suddenly become an expert on DNA and its use in forensic investigations! Now we have evidence that another physician had also examined the young man and found no external indications of bodily injury. This fact was known to the police but it chose to ignore it, until the report was exposed by Raja Petra in his Malaysia-Today. Although that first physician’s assessment was not a formal forensic examination, nonetheless its negative clinical findings cannot be dismissed. Discrepancy between it and the subsequent official forensic examination must be explained. It throws reasonable doubt to the charge. The story gets even more bizarre. The victim had a special “visit” with Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak right after the alleged incident. Najib apparently took pity to this stranger. Such paternal concerns! Even more inexplicable is why Najib or his subordinates would allow access of this nondescript political climber. Serious Problems Neglected There is no shortage of critical problems facing the country. Citizens’ concerns are far from these sexual shenanigans, real or alleged, lurid or otherwise. They are too busy eking out their daily living. Our leaders’ preoccupation with these silly things merely confirms our deepest suspicions of incompetence and omission at the highest levels. We suffer daily through the rot of our institutions, as when we visit the land office to pay our assessments or see the dilapidation and neglect that is our children’s school. On the roads we are harassed by those menacing Mat Rempits and have to contend with those boys in blue demanding their share of the “road toll.” Where are our leaders? Asleep at the wheel, and with Abdullah, literally so! With the upcoming UMNO elections in December, they are even more distracted. Tun Mahathir, hitherto a trenchant critic of Abdullah, unhesitatingly supports him in this latest action, declaring that it is unlikely for Abdullah to be stupid enough to repeat his (Mahathir’s) mistake of a decade ago. Mahathir deludes himself if he believes that Abdullah has now suddenly become smart or has his priorities right. Mahathir is also mistaken if he thinks that Anwar is as stupid as Abdullah to repeat or be caught with the same mistake. Contrary to Mahathir’s new-found assessment, Abdullah is as inept and incompetent now as he was before Saiful’s statutory declaration. Abdullah will remain so until we get rid of him. Mahathir was wrong on Abdullah before (as he now readily admits); Mahathir is wrong on Abdullah now. When Mahathir asserted that we must get rid of Abdullah for the good of the party and country, his message resonated with the masses. In supporting Abdullah’s current foolish action, Mahathir not only risks diluting his central message but also jeopardizes his last chance at remedying his earlier grievous error in anointing Abdullah. With Abdullah asleep at the wheel, continue to expect the worse. As for this sodomy charge, look ahead to the mainstream media to be filled with silly utterances of our politicians and pundits, as well as prurient details of this slimy case. I for one do not look forward to the graphic description of the private anatomy of this pretty boy who started the ball (pardon me, his balls) rolling. ...source

Malaysia Sodomised I

Fumbling hospital denial highlights conspiracy Kim Quek 01 August 2008 - Malaysia Today It is the unanimous opinion at home and abroad that the current sodomy allegation is a political conspiracy to prevent Anwar from leading Pakatan Rakyat in an imminent take-over of power from a crumbling Barisan Nasional. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Hospital Pusrawi made an attempt through a press statement to negate its own medical report that shows no sodomy on Saiful (Anwar’s aide). However, its repeatedly contradictory and evasive answers to probing questions from reporters during the press conference clearly revealed that the hospital was merely putting up a show to hide the truth. In the press conference on July 30, the hospital’s general manager Wan Mahmood Wan Yaacob (accompanied by the hospital’s medical director Kamaruddin Ahmad) denied the Saiful medical report related to sodomy, considered the examining doctor as unqualified to examine for sodomy, and even cast doubt on the authenticity of the Saiful report that is in wide circulation. He made all these assertions despite overwhelming evidences to the contrary. However, under unrelenting questioning, Wan Mahmood admitted that the report in circulation “looks the same, contents are the same” as the original report. Then why did the hospital go into the redundant measure of setting up a three-men committee to probe into the authenticity of the circulating report - which bears all the hallmarks of typical Barisan Nasional tactic to delay and prevent the truth from emerging? Dr. Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid who examined Saiful Bukhari Azlan at 2.00 pm on June 28 clearly stated in his report on Saiful that the patient had no bleeding, tear or scar in the rectal/anal area and that he appeared “alert, comfortable, not pale”. Under the heading “diagnosis”, Dr. Osman wrote: TRO Assault (Sodomy) (TRO stands for ‘to rule out’). It means Dr. Osman ruled out sodomy. Under the heading “rawatan” (treatment), Dr. Osman wrote: Advise to go to the government hospital (plan to do police report). It means that the doctor asked Saiful to go to a government hospital for a check-up as required by law, since he was going to make a police report. This medical report, though brief, is a true record that Dr. Osman had examined Saiful and found no physical evidence of sodomy. Such a report could preclude subsequent medical finding to the contrary, considering that, four hours after Dr. Osman’s examination, Saiful visited Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) where he made a police report and subjected himself to another medical examination, the contents of which are now being zealously guarded by the police. With regards to Dr. Osman’s competence, both Wan Mahmood and Kamaruddin said they “had no doubt on Mohamed’s credibility as a doctor” and further commented, “He was a good doctor”. With such an appraisal, it is puzzling how Dr. Osman, who is 56 years old and has twenty years of medical experience, could be considered as unfit to carry out a simple examination on a sodomy assault. In fact, Dr. Osman’s report is not only relevant in the court of law, it is also invaluable to the police engaged in their preliminary investigation on the veracity of this sodomy allegation. Instead of treasuring this evidence, though, the Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Ismail Omar, called the disclosure of this evidence as an attempt to “sabotage” police investigations and to “confuse” the public, while he inexplicably refused to comment on this medical report. Unless he considered the report a fake, how on earth could he condemn it as an act of sabotage? The refusal by Ismail and other government leaders and officials to comment on the substance of this report, while steadfastly calling for punishment against the informer who leaked this report, is exemplary of the long established government policy of nailing the whistle-blower to protect the culprit. Isn’t the government’s deafening silence on this report an emphatic admission that it is genuine and relevant? Isn’t Hospital Pusrawi’s feeble attempt at deception a manifestation that the authority concerned lacked the courage to discredit this report by itself? It is pertinent to ask: Is the present police exercise an attempt to find out the truth about the sodomy allegation or is it an all-out effort to fix Anwar Ibrahim? The latter seems to be the case, judging from Deputy IGP Ismail’s response to Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar’s admonition to police to wrap up its work “as soon as possible” following the explosive revelation of the Saiful medical report. Ismail said the police had been “relentlessly seeking relevant and the latest information ….. constantly looking for new leads.” That sounds like someone who has been hunting down a serial murderer rather than investigating an alleged sodomy rapist who does not appear to have committed the offence – as per Dr. Osman’s report and Anwar’s alibi. This Hospital Pusrawi debacle is only the latest in series of tactics that betray ill-intent to persecute Anwar, such as: * Denying Anwar a copy of Saiful’s police report without reason. * Ambushing and arresting Anwar in a high-handed manner that befits a top international terrorist, forcing him to sleep overnight on a cold cement floor, resulting in a flare-up of his spinal injury, which was inflicted during a similar sodomy charge 10 years ago. * Police and top leaders harassing Anwar to submit for DNA sampling when it is neither needed nor called for. Anwar refused the requests on the ground that it may be used for fabricating false evidence just like it was done in a similar trial 10 years ago. * Constantly casting aspersions as a sodomite against Anwar in government controlled press and TV channels. It is the unanimous opinion at home and abroad that the current sodomy allegation is a political conspiracy to prevent Anwar from leading Pakatan Rakyat in an imminent take-over of power from a crumbling Barisan Nasional. Many consider this a replay of the event ten years ago when Anwar was similarly accused and persecuted. However, unlike the 1988 event when the prime mover was the Prime Minister (Mahathir Mohamad), Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi does not seem to be playing a similar role. In fact, both the PM and Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar whose portfolio includes the police force do not appear to be on top of the police force which seems to be the mover and shaker of events that are fast changing our political landscape. Like the plot to fix Anwar, his Hollywood-style arrest, the recent gridlock of traffic in Kuala Lumpur and sealing off of Parliament House, etc. - these high-handed measures have incurred the wrath of the people, and all Abdullah and Hamid could do was to act as apologists for the police. Another example was the issue of Anwar’s DNA. Both seemed to have been duped into making a fool of themselves by publicly demanding Anwar to submit to DNA sampling when the government is already in possession of Anwar’s DNA. Did Abdullah and Hamid know about the ulterior motive of collecting Anwar’s fresh blood sample now? I bet not. The police force is ruled with an iron fist by Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan. He and Attorney-General Gani Patail had played leading roles in the infamous trials of Anwar Ibrahim ten years ago and are now under investigation by the Anti-Corruption Agency for alleged fabrication of evidence against Anwar then. Though Abdullah said a few days ago that both Musa and Gani would not be involved with the current Anwar sodomy investigation, how convincing are such assurances when both remain bosses in their respective bodies? We have no doubt of Abdullah’s sincerity when he asked for another two years for him to carry our reforms that he had failed to do previously. And we think the current crisis created by the sodomy allegation is a golden opportunity for him to stamp his mark as a reformer by righteously exercising the immense power vested in his hand as Prime Minister and order that rule of law be strictly observed in the resolution of this crisis. Considering our vastly changed political landscape and the precarious economic and political situation we are in now, any repetition of the unjust treatment meted out to Anwar in 1998 will surely bring unimaginable consequences to the nation. ...source

The plot to frame Anwar is revealed!

The plot to frame Anwar is revealed! 30 July 2008 - Aliran The civilised world must be outraged by what is taking place in Malaysia. Justice is being trampled upon and truth is being sacrificed for political expediency without shame or remorse. And it is not fair that we have to suffer this humiliation. Thinking Malaysians are perplexed how on earth the police went ahead to investigate Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy even though there were allegedly medical reports confirming that there was no basis for their action. According to the medical report in the possession of Malaysiakini, Saiful was never sodomised by anyone, least of all by Anwar Ibrahim. Dr Mohamed Osman Hamid from the Hospital Pusrawi had confirmed this fact after physically examining Saiful on 28 June 2008. Yet four hours later, Saiful made a police report at the police pondok in Hospital Kuala Lumpur that Anwar had sodomised him. At 6.00pm on that day, Saiful went to Hospital Kuala Lumpur for his second medical examination which, according to an unverified report by Raja Petra, also confirmed that Saiful was not sodomised. Nevertheless, he made his police report against Anwar. The police cannot claim that they were in the dark over the existence of these reports. In any case, the police are required to send victims of rape or sodomy for a medical examination to confirm the allegations and collect vital medical evidence for prosecution purposes. When Saiful made that damning report against Anwar, he must have surely disclosed to the police that such an examination had already been carried out by doctors. That being the case, the police would have obtained these reports and must be fully aware that the police report made by Saiful was therefore without any merit. Yet, why was Anwar arrested, questioned and detained? Doesn’t this indicate that there was a plot to vilify him and convict him on false charges? If the police had acted professionally, would they have gone ahead with what they had done, unnecessarily putting to risk their reputation and credibility? Or were they taking instructions from politicians who felt threatened and therefore were bent on destroying Anwar to preserve their power base? The whole sodomy episode reeks with injustice and stinks to high heaven. This sordid affair brings to mind something that was said long ago: “Of all injustice, that is the greatest which goes under the name of law, and of all sorts of tyranny the forcing of the letter of the law against equity, is the most insupportable.” Under the circumstance, Aliran is horrified and revolted that the police have seemingly paid scant respect to the rule of law. They owe an explanation to the public. There are reports floating around that Dr Mohamed Osman Hamid from the Hospital Pusrawi had gone missing because it is alleged that he is being harassed to change the report to implicate Anwar. Aliran would like to know if this is true. Aliran would like to know whether the medical report in the possession of Malaysiakini apparently from Hospital Pusrawi and signed by Dr Mohamed Osman Hamid is genuine and a true and faithful copy of the original report that is with Hospital Pusrawi. Aliran would like to know whether the police is brave enough to make public the existing reports from hospital Puswari and Hospital Kuala Lumpur in order to end the rumours circulating that these reports have indeed vindicated Anwar Ibrahim. Aliran would like to know in the event when these reports are verified as true and genuine whether the police would forthwith drop all charges against Anwar and stop hounding him as if he has a case to answer. Aliran would like to know when it is established that Saiful had made a false report to the police whether he would be arrested and charged immediately. Aliran would like to know the unseen hands behind this episode who had apparently used Saiful to frame Anwar for their political survival. This matter has dragged on long enough and it is time to bring it to a closure without any further delay. Will the Prime Minister out of respect for the dignity of the human being and in fairness to justice display common decency in setting up a Commission of Inquiry to bring to book all those who had tarnished our nation with their nefarious activities which had brought to question the credibility of our police force? P Ramakrishnan President 29 July 2008 ...source

Were the Anwar Sodomy Charges Faked?

Were the Anwar Sodomy Charges Faked? Jed Yoong 28 July 2008 - Asia Sentinel A medical report surfaces saying the male aide who filed charges against the opposition leader wasn’t molested See the Doctor's Report The doctor who examined a 23-year-old male aide allegedly sodomized by Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim found no evidence of tearing or scarring that would indicate penetration, according to a medical report leaked to local journalists. If the document is genuine, it can be expected to raise further suspicions of complicity on the part of top government leaders in attempting to destroy Anwar politically. The charges against Anwar, filed by the youth on June 28, could end the opposition politician's political career and put him back behind bars, where he had spent six years from 1999 on similar charges, which human rights organizations across the world condemned as trumped up. Sodomy is a crime punishable by up to 20 years imprisonment and caning Anwar was arrested two weeks after the youth filed the complaint and was jailed overnight on July 15 after police, some wearing balaclava masks, descended on his home, a move that sent Anwar's supporters into the streets around the police station where he was being held. He refused at that time to give a DNA specimen, charging that it could be misused. According the medical report, which allegedly was filed at Hospital Pusrawi Sdn Bhd on Jalan Tun Razak in Kuala Lumpur, the aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, was examined by Dr Mohamed Osman on June 28 at 2 pm. After he had gone to the hospital to complain about pain he said he was suffering in his anus, he allegedly told hospital personnel that he had been assaulted by a "very important person." After Dr Mohamad refused to write a report that Saiful had been sodomized, according to Malaysia Today, the doctor suggested that the youth obtain another diagnosis at a government hospital. Doctors at that hospital also refused to confirm a diagnosis of sodomy, according to the publication, although it did not name the doctors. Nonetheless, Malaysia Today reported, Saiful filed the report of assault at a nearby police kiosk four hours later. After Mohamad Osman made the report indicating no sexual assault had taken place, police picked up the doctor and detained him for three days to attempt to persuade him to change his diagnosis, according to Malaysia Today. The doctor, the publication said, has since gone into hiding with his family. In a telephone interview with Asia Sentinel, Deputy Inspector General of Police Ismail Omar confirmed that Dr Mohamad had been questioned, but said he had never been detained. Attempts to reach hospital officials were unsuccessful. They were said to be in a meeting. However, although the medical report could not be independently verified, a senior Pusrawi Hospital official told the Internet publication Malaysiakini this morning that the hospital had launched an internal investigation on how Saiful's medical report was leaked, which is widely considered as a major infringement of patient privacy. When Malaysiakini showed the official a copy of the report, he refused to return it but he didn't describe it as fake, saying, "It's our document." Anwar's party issued a statement saying that "the medical report leaked today appears to confirm what we have always believed - that the allegations against Anwar Ibrahim are without merit and politically motivated." The existence of the report, the statement continued, "further erodes any confidence the public would have in the credibility of the police report that has been filed against Anwar Ibrahim, a report which remains shrouded in secrecy. Why has this medical report surfaced only today, over one month after the allegations were made, after (Anwar) spent a night in jail, and after the police have spent so much time and money on this case?" Anwar and his three-party coalition, made up of his own Parti Keadilan Rakyat, the Democratic Action Party and Parti Islam se-Malaysia, are attempting to oust the ruling Barisan Nasional, or National Coalition, from 50 years of unbroken power. In March 8 elections, the opposition coalition broke the two-thirds hold the BN had enjoyed in parliament since independence. Anwar was in the political wilderness for a decade after he broke with former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in 1998. Although the 1999l sodomy charge against him was later reversed, the 61-year-old former deputy prime minister was barred from running for political office because the corruption charge remained. That ban, however, has been repealed and Anwar expects to stand in a by-election. If he is victorious, he has repeatedly forecast that in mid-September he will lure enough pro-Barisan lawmakers this side to take over the government. Anwar has made numerous allegations of political corruption against top leaders of the United Malays National Organisation, the lead party in the three-party Barisan Nasional. If the coalition indeed takes power, top members of the government, the judiciary and law enforcement have a great deal to fear. Anwar has already sought to have his original conviction reversed and has filed charges against Abdul Ghani Patail, the attorney general, and Musa Hassan, the chief of police for allegedly fabricating the evidence against him in the original case. Malaysia Today earlier reported that a witness told the publication Saiful had met with Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, the designated successor to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Anwar's rival for political power, concerning the filing of the charges. Najib had first told reporters he had never met with the youth and later said he had only met him briefly for "career counseling." Raja Petra himself has been a major source of embarrassment to the government, directly accusing Najib and his wife of being involved in the brutal execution murder of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu, who was shot twice in the head in October of 2006 and dumped in a patch of jungle before she was blown up with plastic explosive. In response, the government - although neither Najib nor his wife - has charged Raja Petra with both sedition and criminal libel, a statute that is very rarely used today and deals with the danger to national security. Raja Petra, a member of the Selangor sultanate, has refused to back down, saying that if he goes to jail, he intends to take Najib down with him. Prime Minister Badawi has fully backed Najib and named him as his successor. Despite numerous attempts to get Najib into court for interrogation, the judge in the year-old trial of one of his best friends and two of his bodyguards for Altantuya's murder has refused to call him, most recently last week. ...source

Credibility of Justice System At Stake

Press Release: Saiful's medical report Ambiga Sreenevasan - President, Malaysian Bar 28 July 2008 Very troubling reports have been published, which reveal the existence of a medical report of an examination done by a doctor on Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan a few hours before Saiful lodged a police report that he had been sodomised. The medical report apparently shows that there is no evidence that he had been sodomised by anyone. Such reports raise some very serious questions that require immediate answers: (1) Are the police in possession of such a medical report? (2) Was the doctor concerned interviewed by the police and was he detained for any length of time? (3) Is the doctor concerned facing any form of intimidation and if so, by whom? (4) Is there a medical report by another doctor that either confirms or contradicts the first medical report? (5) If it is true that the medical report exists showing a lack of prima facie evidence, what then could have been the justification for the vigorous actions taken against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as well as the public call by the authorities for his DNA sample? The answers to these questions are of paramount importance, as they bring into focus the integrity of our law enforcement system. These latest disclosures regarding the investigations into the sodomy allegations are not the only ones to raise questions that need answering. There is, for example, also the issue of P. Balasubramaniam’s abrupt “disappearance” that has yet to be satisfactorily explained. No one can deny that the circumstances of his first and second statutory declarations are highly unusual. All these show a pattern of events that cause much disquiet to right-thinking members of the public. The Malaysian people are deeply troubled. A country that truly believes in the rule of law should not be faced with so many disturbing developments and unanswered questions. The credibility of the Malaysian justice system as a whole is therefore at stake. The integrity of professionals, be they doctors or lawyers, must never be interfered with. The public must be left in no doubt that the criminal justice system in this country will not be misused or abused. There must be nothing less than an open and thorough investigation into these cases. This calls for the courage and professionalism of all those involved to do the right thing no matter the consequences. And those who have shown such courage and integrity must know that they live in a country where it is safe to do so. Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan President Malaysian Bar ...source

No sodomy - Malaysians taken for a ride

It has now been revealed that the doctor who examined Saiful 4 hours before he made his police report (which until today has not been released to the accused person) has reported that Saiful was not sodomised.

The doctor stated in his report that there was

• "zero active bleeding"
  
• "zero ulcer or pus"
  
• "zero tear and scar"
  

in Saiful's anus.

Malaysians have been taken for a ride.

Doctor: No evidence of sodomy Jul 28, 2008 - Malaysiakini There is no evidence that Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan was sodomised, according to the doctor who examined him four hours before he lodged a police report alleging he was sexually assaulted by PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim. It is believed that Anwar's former aide Saiful (left) went to two different hospitals on June 28 - the day he lodged the police report claiming that he was sodomised by his ex-boss. He first went to Hospital Pusrawi (Pusat Rawatan Islam) in Jalan Tun Razak - a government-linked Islamic medical institution - at about 2pm. According to a copy of the two-page medical report obtained by malaysiakini yesterday, Saiful went to the hospital complaining of 'tenesmus' - a medical term for difficulty and pain in passing motion. He was examined by Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid, the medical officer on duty. The doctor said that the patient had alleged he was assaulted by the intrusion of a piece of "plastic" in the anus. Mohamed Osman, according to his medical report which was recorded at 2.14pm, found "zero active bleeding", "zero ulcer or pus", "zero tear and scar" in Saiful's anus. He also stated that Saiful appeared "alert", "comfortable", "not pale" and did not show any fever symptoms. ...more

Doctor on the run: police want him to fabricate evidence against Anwar NO HOLDS BARRED - Malaysia Today Raja Petra Kamarudin The doctor’s report says it very clearly. Saiful was never sodomised, either by Anwar or anyone else. Why is the government still pursuing the case against Anwar? And why are they looking for the doctor who has now gone underground with his whole family? On 21 July 2008, I published an article in this same column called HOW, YET AGAIN, THEY ARE TRYING TO FABRICATE EVIDENCE AGAINST ANWAR. (Read the article here ). In that article I mentioned as follows: You see, they asked a certain doctor from a certain hospital to conduct an examination on Saiful. The doctor did so and he came out with a report that said there is no evidence Anwar had ever penetrated or sodomised the young man. The police then picked up the doctor and detained him for three days. As much as they tried to force him to change his report to implicate Anwar he refused to do so. Until today, the doctor stands by his report that there is no evidence Anwar had sodomised Saiful. He knows he is going to be made to pay for this but he doesn’t care. He is not going to change his report and say that Anwar sodomised Saiful whatever they do to him. Exasperated, the police had to release Anwar on personal bond or police bail. The doctor refuses to doctor his report and neither does Anwar want to volunteer his new specimen. Well, that doctor’s name is Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid from the Hospital Pusrawi and he has now taken his entire family and has gone into hiding because the police are looking for him and they want him to change his medical report. At 2.00pm on 28 June 2008, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan went to see Dr Mohamed Osman to complain about a pain he is suffering in his anus. Saiful told the doctor that he had been assaulted by ‘a very important person’ -- meaning, of course, sodomised by Anwar Ibrahim. Dr Mohamed Osman examined Saiful but found no evidence that he had been sodomised, either by Anwar Ibrahim or anyone else for that matter. The doctor’s report (which can be viewed below) says that there is zero (0) skin tearing, zero (0) active bleeding, zero (0) traces of pus, etc., which basically means he can’t be suffering from a pain in the anus as what he alleges. The doctor’s diagnosis is that he rules out or TRO (to rule out) assault (sodomised). In short: Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan is not suffering any pain in the anus and neither was he assaulted or sodomised in the anus. Saiful then said he would like to make a police report so Dr Mohamed Osman suggested he go for a second medical examination at a government hospital. Saiful did so and the doctor at the government hospital also came out with the same diagnosis. Nevertheless, Saiful still made his police report at the pondok police in the hospital. In spite of the doctors all confirming that Saiful was never sodomised, the police still pursued the case. Anwar Ibrahim was subsequently arrested by about 20 SWAT members in Balaclavas and armed to the teeth in a dramatic movie-style action-packed drama in front of his house after he had confirmed he would be reporting to the police station at 2.00pm as required. The police detained Anwar in the lockup until the next morning and even brought him to the hospital for examination and to try to obtain his specimen for what the police say are for purposes of doing a DNA profile. The fact that the police already have Anwar’s DNA profile from 1998, plus the doctors from both hospitals confirm that Saiful was never sodomised, did not seem to matter. Clearly the government is attempting to fabricate evidence against Anwar and is trying to indict him on trumped-up charges of sodomy. And who but the slime-ball AG and scumbag IGP, the same two players in the 1998 episode, can be behind this latest travesty of justice. The doctor’s report says it very clearly. Saiful was never sodomised, either by Anwar or anyone else. Why is the government still pursuing the case against Anwar? And why are they looking for the doctor who has now gone underground with his whole family? Civil society movements, NGOs and the Malaysian Bar Council must not remain silent. The police have already detained the doctor for three days but he still refuses to doctor his medical report. Anwar did not sodomise Saiful and the doctor’s report says it very clearly. And the police also have a copy of this same report that I have published below so they know what I know. And now Malaysians also already know what I and the police know -- that Saiful was never sodomised by anyone. ...more

Political Motivations Undermine Anwar Case

Malaysia: Political Motivations Undermine Anwar Case Human Rights Watch (New York, July 21, 2008) – Malaysian government allegations that opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim forcibly sodomized a male aide lack credibility, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch is concerned that Anwar’s arrest was a politically motivated attempt to derail the opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat’s (People’s Alliance) much-publicized campaign to form a new government by September 16, 2008. Human Rights Watch urged the Malaysian government to ensure any investigations are transparent, impartial, and in accordance with international standards of due process. “The Malaysian government’s record provides little basis to believe this is anything other than a partisan political attack on Anwar,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “In light of past false allegations and his unfair trial, Anwar has good reason to worry that his rights won’t be respected.” The police have to date refused to release the first information report lodged by former aide Saiful Bukhari Azlan on June 28. Anwar’s lawyers have repeatedly requested the report, which under Malaysian law is a public document. A person named in a first information report has the right to a copy of the report. The refusal of the police to make the original report public has fueled suspicions that it may be altered. Saiful remains under police protection. Human Rights Watch said that the arrest of Anwar on July 16, one hour before he was due at Kuala Lumpur Police Contingent Headquarters for questioning, was unnecessary and heavy-handed. Anwar has repeatedly pledged – the last time just before his arrest on July 16 – to fully cooperate with the investigation. Some 20 police officers in 10 cars stopped Anwar, who was returning home by car, and took him in a police car for questioning. Many wore balaclavas to hide their identities. After more than five hours of questioning, police kept Anwar in a holding cell overnight with no bed. He had to sleep on a cement floor despite a well-known back problem. “The police operation to arrest Anwar was designed to intimidate and punish,” Adams said. “This inquiry has already raised serious concerns about police bias, transparency, and the government’s willingness to flout the law for political ends.” Sodomy, even if consensual, is punishable by up to 20 years of imprisonment. It is unclear whether Anwar will be formally charged with sodomy. The standard practice in Malaysia is that once police conclude investigations, they forward the investigation papers to the Attorney General’s Chambers to evaluate the evidence and decide whether to prosecute. Human Rights Watch said that recent comments by senior Cabinet ministers, including Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and Home Minister Syed Hamid that Anwar should provide a DNA sample to the police constitute improper interference. On July 18, Prime Minister Abdullah said “If he is not guilty, why worry about giving a new DNA sample. If he is indeed innocent, there is nothing for him to fear… If he has not done anything, than provide a sample. Do it. I want to see it. Let’s see the result which could prove that he did not do it.” Anwar had refused to voluntarily provide his DNA sample, due to concern that it could be manipulated against him. “Comments by government ministers about Anwar’s case are improper pressure on the police and prosecutor,” said Adams. “Malaysia claims to be a well-ordered democracy wedded to the rule of law, but the Anwar investigation says just the opposite.” Background: Anwar Prosecution, Take Two Human Rights Watch said that the current case bears a strong resemblance to the previous politically motivated corruption and sodomy charges against Anwar in 1998, while he was serving as deputy prime minister and finance minister. Those charges came after Anwar challenged then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad over accusations of corruption, cronyism and mismanagement of the Asian financial crisis, leading to Anwar’s dismissal. The High Courts in 1999 and 2000 sentenced Anwar to a total of 15 years of imprisonment for corruption and sodomy, despite his appearing in court with extensive facial bruises from a police custodial beating by the then national police chief – who was convicted in 2000 for assaulting Anwar – and the grave discrepancies that pervaded the entire police investigation, prosecution and trial processes. Anwar served six years before Malaysia’s apex Federal Court overturned the sodomy conviction in September 2004. Anwar testified on July 16 and 21, 2008 before the Anti-Corruption Agency that the present inspector general of police (then investigating officer in both the corruption and sodomy charges) and attorney general (then senior deputy public prosecutor for the sodomy case) fabricated evidence in relation to the serious assault he suffered while under police custody. Anwar was barred from running for a parliamentary seat at the time of Malaysia’s general elections on March 8, 2008, but the coalition he is credited with forging, Pakatan Rakyat, succeeded in drastically reducing the power of the long-dominant Barisan Nasional (National Front) government coalition by winning 81 parliamentary seats and seizing control of five state governments, including Selangor and Penang. Until March, Barisan Nasional had enjoyed a two-thirds, veto-proof majority in the 222-seat house and the control of all state governments except one. ...source

Gimme Your DNA II

The following is a sample of what many Malaysians think of the improper and illogical behaviour of BN politicians including the PM in demanding that Anwar provide fresh samples of his DNA (from Malaysiakini).

'DNA profiling is permanent' Jul 22, 2008 - Malaysiankini ‘The idea that the current government and police force need to have Anwar's blood for new DNA profiling is illogical.’ On Existing DNA sample too old, says PM DR PR: Why must Syed Hamid Albar and the PM coax Anwar Ibrahim to give a blood specimen? What interest do they have in this episode if it is not political? The survival or demise of BN depends on the outcome of this case. The Mahathir family and the DPM have their worries too. The PM and Syed Hamid have said that Anwar has nothing to fear and foreign experts may obtain the specimen. Either they do not understand or pretend not to understand the fears of DSAI. To put it bluntly, a blood or serum specimen from DSAI could be introduced by catheter into the rectum of the complainant (or mixed in vitro ie. with Saiful's specimen outside of the body in a test tube) and any sample taken from Saiful will show the presence of Anwar's DNA. Thus Anwar will be found to guilty of sodomy. Simple. I have two suggestions to get around this problem: 1. Get a foreign DNA expert to obtain a specimen from Saiful, create a DNA profile, seal the results and leave it with the court under security (or should it be double security?). Subsequently, get Anwar’s specimen and compare his DNA profile with that obtained from Saiful. 2. The other option would be to radio-label Anwar's specimen. If the radio isotope is detectable in Saiful's specimen, then you will know that it has been planted. Dr Nedu: It was the joke of the century when the PM commented on the DNA. The funny part is he got the facts wrong. When the experts collect blood samples the get the coding, it is translated into a chart which is on permanent record. This record is done once, and that's it. It is something like profiling a blood test. If you are in the group of A+, then you are forever A+. It is unnecessary to withdraw blood to get the grouping after 10 years or 20 years. The grouping will not change. Likewise, DNA profiling is permanent. The idea that the current government and police force need to have Anwar's blood for new DNA profiling is illogical. This simply shows the lack of knowledge among this group of people and to paint bad picture about DSAI refusing to allow blood sample taken from him. Why is PM getting involved when he said police are independent and that the Umno politicians are not getting involved in the investigation of the so-called sodomy case of DSAI.? Why did he say ‘we’? That shows he is part of the team that accused DSAI of sodomy. Forget about the sodomy case. Look at other important unsolved cases, like the missing Sharline, Lingam tape, Altantuya murder, missing Bala, and Datuk Johari's cases. etc. After all is said and done, DSAI is the best leader this nation can get. We the rakyat want him as our next PM. V for Vernon: While scientists the world over have extracted and reliably used DNA from over tens of thousands of years ago, our local saintis kampung in the form of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi says that ten-year-old DNA samples are no good and that they need fresh DNA from Anwar. Genetic experts should weigh in on the range, by way of confidence intervals for example, on how precise the age of a DNA sample can be pinpointed. For example, if they have Anwar's DNA from 10 years ago and tried to plant it as evidence, it may clearly be debunked using objective tests that indicate a sample obtained from a time period not corresponding to the time that Saiful says he was sodomised. (i.e., DNA does indeed disintegrate over time, yet does not lose its ability to ‘finger print’ the individual). On the other hand, fresh DNA might fall within a range of estimates for the time period corresponding to Saiful's allegation. That may be why the government and the police are increasingly desperate to obtain fresh DNA samples from Anwar, so that if planted, it becomes very uncertain exactly when it was ‘deposited’ into Saiful's posterior, with the actual planting of evidence becoming indistinguishable from the alleged act of depositing semen by way of sodomy. Concerned Malaysian: I am neither in support of nor against the government but a concerned Malaysian watching this unfortunate sodomy accusation episode. A question came to my mind - if I am not mistaken, the government already has the data on Anwar's DNA taken in the past. This data can be used by the police to match any DNA taken from the place of offence as described by the accuser. If the DNA taken from the place of offence matches the data taken in the past then the police would have sufficient evidence to charge Anwar. Why the need for a fresh sample, and the reason that Anwar's DNA sample taken in the past being too old? Too old for what purpose? Enough Already: Dinosaur DNA can still be analysed after how many millions of years, but Anwar's decade-old DNA sample is too old? For what? Why not say Anwar's thumb print in his IC is too old? What's the prime minister doing publicly taking sides on an issue under police investigation anyway? Do he have a vested interest in a certain outcome? Kenneth: In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11, it states: Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which they have had all the guarantees necessary for their defence. In short, it means ‘innocent until proven guilty’. So it's quite a shock for me when our prime minister says ‘If he has not done anything, than provide a sample. Do it. I want to see it. Let's see the result which could prove that he did not do it.’ I might be wrong, but as far as I know, it's not up to us to prove we are innocent, but up to the police and the prosecutor to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the judge. Smelly Evidence: Why do the police not get international experts to be brought in to examine the DNA evidence of Saiful first before testing it with that of DSAI? If the government wants to make things transparent, then they should get several independent experts to extract Saiful’s DNA, verify them to make sure that they are all similar before publicly comparing it with the DNA of DSAI. That way, there will be no doubt if the evidence have been tampered with. I doubt the police or government will agree to this as they are hiding too many facts from the public again. Even Saiful’s police report has not been given to DSAI to date. GK: When did our PM became a DNA specialist? The experts are telling us that DNA could be preserved for a number of years. What happened to the DNA samples taken in 1998? Perhaps the BN has finished it up for their fabrication. The whole world knows that DSAI was framed in 1998 and that the current BN is trying to direct Dr Mahathir’s drama again. The police are not releasing their police report, but are hungry for DSAI’s DNA sample. Mengchai: ‘If he has not done anything, then provide a sample. Do it. I want to see it. Let's see the result which could prove that he did not do it,’ he (Pak Lah) told reporters. Once bitten twice shy. You have given many assurances, but with your flip-flop decisions, it may change overnight. You may not do it. Can you trust your people? Whatever you say, the rakyat has already lost confidence in you and won’t swallow every word you utter. Increasing the petrol price didn’t take long, but reducing the tolls will take months. We know you have two years and by then you may have forgotten the development your promised your home state. Do you think you will be remembered as one of the great PMs of Malaysia? A Concerned Citizen: I personally feel that this DNA sampling is not necessary, since there is no official police report available to Anwar on what charges he has been indicted on. All this while, we’ve only heard and read the charges in the news and newspaper. Where is the actual report? Maybe if the police can make this available, then Anwar can go for the DNA sampling. And this must be done under the observation of foreign experts, whom I suggest to handle this case since I don’t trust the police. Secondly, the police should make Saiful’s report available to Anwar since they don’t have the right to withhold it. Is there any law that can force the police to release this report? If no, Anwar can sue the force for lodging a false report against him and ask the court to drop the case once and for all. So far with the investigations of this case, we’ve only heard the police and the government pester Anwar to give his DNA. What the heck do they want if they can’t even compel the police to release the police report lodged against Anwar? Chong Yee Yap: I find it very distressing to read so many comments that keep repeating themselves about Anwar's DNA and all that stuff about the corrupt police and the judiciary. Yes, I too agree that the police and the judges of the Malaysian courts just cannot be trusted, but nobody has even touched on proof of the evidence of the corruption of police and judges. We have all been told that Anwar has given the police his alibi. That is enough for the police to begin their investigation, and only if police in the course of their investigation find more incriminating evidence that is not consistent with Anwar's alibi can they ask for another explanation. This procedure has not been adhered to, therefore it is very timely and correct for the public to be suspicious of the intentions of the police. Anwar is right in not providing his DNA because he is not required to do so on grounds ‘self-incrimination’. No accused person can be compelled to self-incriminate himself. That is the law and it must be adhered to. The next point that I want to raise to evidence is the fact that Saiful has confessed to sodomy. He has said that he committed sodomy with Anwar, and that means he is a self-confessed sodomite. I am not saying that he did, but I am saying is that he has confessed to sodomy and in his confession he has confessed to being an accomplice to the offence. This therefore places the burden on the police and the AG to instantly prosecute Saiful for sodomy. The conviction of Saiful does not necessarily mean that Anwar participated in the crime because there is no evidence that implicates Anwar. It is for that reason that we can say the police and the AG's office want to frame Anwar with fresh DNA. Everybody knows that DNA has been kept active for centuries, only our PM does not know that. From my perspective, I believe that Anwar's team ought to consider this approach because that is the law. Ahmad Fuad: I am a complete greenhorn in this dog-eat-dog world of Malaysian politics. But when I hear and read of how a squad of ten (or was it fifteen? Whatever lah) public-funded vehicles, loaded with public-funded police in full battle gear (balaclavas and all), I told myself, ‘Ah...there's something more here! ‘It cannot just be about arresting a 61-year-old man who's only weapon that he carries is God-given. I was sure that it was about ‘someone’ setting out to embarrass someone else.’ Thank you, gentlemen. I am now not only convinced, I now also have (and I am sure others out there, too) a very good idea of those behind this satanic scheme: the players, the financiers and all the way up to the ‘producers’. Thank you, sirs. You made my day. Andrew Lee: Give Anwar’s accuser a break. He may be waiting for the samples before he continues proper toilet hygiene. JTB: Anwar went through a harrowing experience in 1998. The Malaysian public are not stupid enough not to see that the manner in which he was arrested was all a set up to treat him like a wanted terrorist. Did you notice the markings on the jacket of one of the ski masked special force chaps? Team A is written, presumably because they used the best team in the force to apprehend Anwar. What fresh sample is needed? His DNA has been taken in 1998 and they already have the records of his DNA profile. If I was Anwar, I would not give my blood sample to the police, not after the great set up in the 1998 episode. We Malaysians feel that there is no need for you to subject yourself to this humiliation anymore. Your refusal to give your blood sample for DNA profiling is now a symbol of your cause to challenge an oppressive regime. We still remember how the prosecution fixed up the mattress incident. How can we forget Augustine Paul expunging the evidence? I would like to know about the alleged victim, Saiful, who was sent to the hospital and examined. Was he stripped naked, measured and photographed? Most Malaysians would like to ask the prime minister, ‘Why is it so difficult for the police to give a copy of the police report made by Saiful to Anwar Ibrahim or his lawyer? Do you not think that Anwar is an interested party in this matter? Why the secrecy? Have the police now declared that Saiful’s report is now sulit and protected under the ‘Official Secrets Act’? Can the Prime Minister tell Malaysians whether there was a police report made by Saiful or not? We Malaysians have a right to know. CSI Fan: I don't understand why the police need to get a new DNA specimen from Anwar. The police should already have his DNA profile from 1998 and that can be used to compare with the evidence found in this new case. Don’t our police save the DNA profiles of convicted sex offenders like Codis in the US? If we don't have such a database, just open the old files. JKS: If you watch documentaries on Astro, there are so many instances in ‘New Detective,’ ‘Bone Detective,’ ‘Discovery Magazine’ and other programmess where you would have seen than DNA samples (blood, tissue or semen) preserved for years at room temperature in an evidence room, nearly a century in paraffin wax and Alaskan permafrost, and presumably centuries in the freezer under certain natural and artificial preservation methods such as embalming chemicals. The PM and home minister are faking sincerity, and are made to talk by their home ministry and law enforcement underlings. The tail is wagging the dog. The public can only assume that some rogue underlings need fresh blood to plant as fake evidence. Nothing else delivers relevant information, exchanges good arguments, sharpens the public debate, and exposes ill-considered and hypocritical arguments as quickly as the mass web media. Jamilah Wahid: The prime minister's statement that a fresh sample is needed to determine DNA identity only shows his ignorance. One has to know that the requirement for a fresh sample is only necessary if there is no record of DNA profile of the relevant subject. If there is already a sample in custody (old or new), it does not make any difference if the sole purpose is for the DNA is a profile match. Even the DNA profile in the record (court records of the previous case) would suffice to make the match. Thousand-year-old dinosaurs are being profiled using traces of fossilised samples. In this event, any out-of-the-way demands for a fresh sample will only create suspicions. Chuacj: I am writing from the base of common sense as I am no expect in DNA profiling or any medical field. First thing’s first, I am not sure why the police need the fresh DNA from Anwar, as they already have the previous DNA profile in their records. The police just need to compare the evidence against the old records. The only reason for wanting the fresh DNA is so that they can plant it anywhere they like. Why are Saiful’s charges not being given to Anwar's lawyer? This proves that the police still haven't decided what to charge him with. I support not giving DNA to the police 100% . I hope more NGO will write in support of this and pressure the police to give Saiful’s report to Anwar. Also, why does the PM need to give his view on this and say that the sample is too old? Why is he such a busybody in this case? I believe he has better things to do, like setting up the royal commission for the Bala, Lingam and Raja Petra cases, plus the Sabah (illegal immigrant) case. Stand up like a man and do a man's job. TJ Lee: I find it embarrassing that our prime minister is speaking, again like an ignoramus. I find this incessant demand for Anwar's DNA sample most perplexing. As I understand it, the purpose of a DNA sample in a criminal case (say semen, blood, saliva, a skin flake) is for the purpose of DNA finger printing. Our DNA, like our finger print, is unique to each of us. The likelihood of another person (living or dead) having the same exact DNA as us is extremely, extremely low, except with identical twins. Now, Anwar's DNA finger print would have been in the police records since 1998/1999, would it not? A DNA sample may get stale, but a DNA finger print does not. I mean, my finger print does not get stale through time, does it? So what is this talk about stale DNA sample? It is perplexing. If I am Anwar, I would kick up the same fuss. Why the need for the DNA sample if you already have my DNA finger print? PT Tan: I find Anwar case perplexing. a. Prime Minister says Anwar must give a DNA sample to clear his name. Strange, I thought the police need to find him guilty. Anwar is innocent until proven otherwise. b. His previous DNA profile is deemed old - that is why they need a new sample. I know politicians change parties, change colour and change many other things, but a person’s DNA profile is constant from the day of his conception. Concerned: Many people are uncertain how DNA can be used for manipulation or cheating. Here is one simple way. Suppose Anwar gives his blood and his DNA is tested. The authorities then put away some of it. The rest is used as evidence. The police could then put Anwar in jail because they can confidently declare that it is the same type of DNA found in Saiful. How can that be? Show proof. Voila, there is the proof. The police take out Anwar's DNA that was put away. The only way to prevent this from happening is for somebody to stare at the DNA day and night. Brooklynbridge: Presumably, given its high degree of pleasure, ease of performance, and low expense, sodomy is an act committed with considerable frequency throughout Malaysia, despite being against the law. How many arrests, prosecutions and convictions have there been for this crime? If the government is as zealous about enforcing the law in all cases, not just with its political enemies, the prisons should be full of sodomites - that is, convicted sodomites. ...source