Thursday, July 17, 2008
Making a Martyr of Anwar Ibrahim
By Amina Rasul
“Political murder!” cried Azizah Ismail, wife of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, accusing the ruling United Malay National Organization (UMNO).
Once more, Datuk Anwar, former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, is at the center of controversy in Malaysia. In the process of consolidating his power base to challenge the ruling party, UMNO, Datuk Anwar was recently accused of sodomy by his 23-year-old aide, Saiful Bukhari Azlan. To spice up the already intriguing scenario, Azlan is known to have close ties with current Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak.
Hmmm. Déjà vu. More than a decade ago, a similar charge landed the former deputy PM in jail for six years. The conviction was overturned by the Malaysian Supreme Court in 2004, allowing Datuk Anwar to leave the country for fellowships in London and Washington DC. Then as now, Anwar rejects the charges as politically motivated, part of a conspiracy to bar him from the road to power, a threat to the Barisan Nasional (National Front, the ruling coalition headed by UMNO) which has governed Malaysia since 1957.
The 1998 sodomy charge came at the peak of the power struggle between Prime Minister Mahathir and Datuk Anwar, his deputy. Concurrently appointed as Finance Minister, Datuk Anwar favored foreign investment, trade liberalization and free markets while Mahathir wanted currency controls. While Mahathir criticized the West for Malaysia’s economic plight, blaming currency speculators (like George Soros), Anwar’s supporters were blaming corruption and nepotism for Malaysia’s economic woes.
Is there truth behind the sodomy charges? A survey by the independent Merdeka Center research firm found just 6 percent of respondents believed the allegations and nearly 60 percent viewed it as politically motivated. In a separate poll by the independent news website, Malaysiakini, 94 percent of its respondents believed Anwar was the victim of a conspiracy. More than 7,000 people turned up at an impromptu rally on Tuesday night in support of Anwar.
As a political conspiracy, this was badly planned—as was the first one. The conspirators could not find any whiff of corruption in 1998, so they had to resort to this scurrilous charge? So unbelieving were the electorate that Datuk Anwar’s wife and daughter won when they ran for parliament.
The opposition, spearheaded by Anwar’s People’s Justice Party, has won a significant number of seats in the last election. Anwar’s coalition has been wooing defectors from the ruling National Front. When—not if—Anwar wins a seat in parliament, he will be a formidable opponent for leadership of the Malaysian government. The ruling UMNO party has been weakened by its poor showing in the March elections. Anwar’s three-party coalition won 82 seats, reducing Barisan’s, the National Front’s, lead to a mere 30-seat majority. The opposition now controls five of Malaysia’s 13 states.
Heralded as a voice for democracy, he is an effective bridge between East and West. His friends from the around the globe and from the Islamic world are rallying to his side, calling on the Malaysian government to “facilitate a swift, transparent and just resolution to this issue” as well as to ensure his safety.
Highly regarded internationally, Datuk Anwar is viewed as one of the leaders of an Asian Renaissance. An intellectual who has publicly acknowledged the influence of Jose Rizal, he has many admirers in the Philippines. One of his most ardent admirers is former President Joseph Estrada.
President Erap, who hosted Anwar at a small dinner in his home last month, defended Anwar when the latter was imprisoned. Anwar, in turn, offered moral support when President Erap was jailed. Erap draws the similar patterns of their lives: both were imprisoned, their wives and children ran for political office and won, both are now free. Erap told me last month, “and now Anwar is on the way to the top!” You fill in the blank.
Datuk Anwar’s many Moro friends are hopeful that when he returns to parliament, we might find a Malaysian leadership that would be more sympathetic to our situation in the Mindanao. (Perhaps not too quick to withdraw its peacekeeping forces when pressure mounted.) In the few conversations that I have had with him (in Washington DC, in Doha and in Manila), he struck me as one who had followed the developments in the Bangsamoro homeland very carefully and understood what had to be done.
I hope and pray for the best—for Datuk Anwar, for Malaysia, for Mindanao, for the region. That is all I can do. Thinking about Datuk Anwar keeps me distracted from the daily news circulating about the possibility of imminent war in Mindanao, worries about the withdrawal of the Malaysian contingent and the end of the GRP-MILF agreement on the International Monitoring Team in September.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Anwar saga: Something just doesn’t seem right
Anwar saga: Something just doesn’t seem right
JULY 17 — People like to say Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is willing to do anything to gain power. He's an unscrupulous man who won't stop at anything to become the next prime minister; every move he makes is calculated. Maybe this is right.
But what I cannot understand then is why, if he wants power so badly and calculates his moves so precisely, he would be so stupid as to commit sodomy — especially a person who gives off disinterested vibes? Why molest Saiful Bukhari Azlan if there is even a hint of being found out? Why wreck your chances of becoming prime minister?
Look at it objectively: let’s say, you're a homosexual, or at least bisexual. You stand on the cusp of becoming the most powerful man in the country. Everything is going your way. As long as you can stare the government down, they will blink eventually, their house of cards will fall, and you or someone very close to you (your wife?) will become the next prime minister.
Now, you're in this position because you're not exactly stupid. You know how to rouse public sentiment, and you know how to push particular issues which will endear you to the masses. You might not believe what you say, but you'll say it, because you're willing to put power above your own beliefs.
This is what we're supposed to think Anwar is — a serial sodomite poised to take power riding on his charisma and shrewd lies. You have a right to believe this; I think this is a really twisted way of describing Anwar, but it's a reasonably understandable perspective, given the facts available to the public. Well, understandable, except for one little contradiction.
Why on earth, if you believe you can be the most powerful man in the land in a matter of months or even years, would you rape someone now? You're not stupid, mind. You were caught before, sodomising your driver and stepbrother. Are you going to make exactly the same mistake again, after spending 10 years to climb back to your position of bakal perdana menteri?
Assuming Anwar is as corrupt and power-hungry as we're supposed to believe he is, we have to believe he is willing to avoid joining Umno, avoid taking a huge pay-off he would surely get for acquiescing to the powers that be, and stay clean while pretending to fight for what is right, just for the sake of power. But if we believe this, why would he let all his efforts go to waste by sodomising some guy?
It doesn't jibe; either Anwar is a man who will go all out to obtain power, or he is a man willing to give up his shot at power — something he needed 10 years to reclaim — for the sake of a little non-consensual and illegal fun. Something does not seem right here.
Oh yes, you can go ahead and make further uncharitable assumptions about Anwar. Maybe he's cynically done all this because he's betting nobody will buy the charges against him, regardless of what the courts say, since the courts and our whole justice system are, after all, conveniently rigged in favour of the authorities. But I don't think we have the right to proceed on the basis of groundless hypotheses.
You can come up with a thousand conspiracy theories to fit the facts, after all, and most of them are just about equally plausible. I don't think we have the right to pronounce Anwar guilty without even giving him a trial. His critics love to dwell on the fact that the judges who overturned his conviction felt he was indeed a sodomite; they ignore that those same judges agreed there is reasonable doubt as to whether Anwar actually did commit sodomy.
I wish I could be as optimistic as many of our leaders, from both the BN and PR, appear to be when it comes to the justice system. But the fact is, it is hard to believe that Anwar will get a fair hearing, whether or not he actually committed anal rape.
This is the same fellow who has gone on the record accusing the current Inspector-General of Police and Defence Minister of shocking crimes; considering that some policemen are hard-pressed enough to accept bribes of RM2 (in coins), it is impossible to believe that Anwar will get fair and professional treatment from our police force. It is difficult to see how he will get a fair hearing with the shocking revelations from people like Anwar himself and Justice Ian Chin about the state of our judiciary.
A famous legal adage is that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done. We may not like it, but should the court of public opinion acquit Anwar in spite of a guilty verdict, the fault lies with our law enforcement and judicial institutions for failing to convince the public that he is guilty.
The honour and respectability of our institutions already lie in tatters. I hope we can come up with better smears and better conspiracy theories than the notion that Anwar is at the same time both calculatingly power-hungry and carelessly impatient. If our government wants to put forth a lie and put the final nail in our institutions' coffin, I hope they will at least be prudent enough to make it a good one; if they have found the truth, I hope they will be honest and wise enough to let our institutions and laws do their job, rather than make a mockery of the legal process.
John Lee is a second-year student of economics at Dartmouth College in the United States. He has been thinking aloud since 2005 at www.infernalramblings.com.
JULY 17 — People like to say Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is willing to do anything to gain power. He's an unscrupulous man who won't stop at anything to become the next prime minister; every move he makes is calculated. Maybe this is right.
But what I cannot understand then is why, if he wants power so badly and calculates his moves so precisely, he would be so stupid as to commit sodomy — especially a person who gives off disinterested vibes? Why molest Saiful Bukhari Azlan if there is even a hint of being found out? Why wreck your chances of becoming prime minister?
Look at it objectively: let’s say, you're a homosexual, or at least bisexual. You stand on the cusp of becoming the most powerful man in the country. Everything is going your way. As long as you can stare the government down, they will blink eventually, their house of cards will fall, and you or someone very close to you (your wife?) will become the next prime minister.
Now, you're in this position because you're not exactly stupid. You know how to rouse public sentiment, and you know how to push particular issues which will endear you to the masses. You might not believe what you say, but you'll say it, because you're willing to put power above your own beliefs.
This is what we're supposed to think Anwar is — a serial sodomite poised to take power riding on his charisma and shrewd lies. You have a right to believe this; I think this is a really twisted way of describing Anwar, but it's a reasonably understandable perspective, given the facts available to the public. Well, understandable, except for one little contradiction.
Why on earth, if you believe you can be the most powerful man in the land in a matter of months or even years, would you rape someone now? You're not stupid, mind. You were caught before, sodomising your driver and stepbrother. Are you going to make exactly the same mistake again, after spending 10 years to climb back to your position of bakal perdana menteri?
Assuming Anwar is as corrupt and power-hungry as we're supposed to believe he is, we have to believe he is willing to avoid joining Umno, avoid taking a huge pay-off he would surely get for acquiescing to the powers that be, and stay clean while pretending to fight for what is right, just for the sake of power. But if we believe this, why would he let all his efforts go to waste by sodomising some guy?
It doesn't jibe; either Anwar is a man who will go all out to obtain power, or he is a man willing to give up his shot at power — something he needed 10 years to reclaim — for the sake of a little non-consensual and illegal fun. Something does not seem right here.
Oh yes, you can go ahead and make further uncharitable assumptions about Anwar. Maybe he's cynically done all this because he's betting nobody will buy the charges against him, regardless of what the courts say, since the courts and our whole justice system are, after all, conveniently rigged in favour of the authorities. But I don't think we have the right to proceed on the basis of groundless hypotheses.
You can come up with a thousand conspiracy theories to fit the facts, after all, and most of them are just about equally plausible. I don't think we have the right to pronounce Anwar guilty without even giving him a trial. His critics love to dwell on the fact that the judges who overturned his conviction felt he was indeed a sodomite; they ignore that those same judges agreed there is reasonable doubt as to whether Anwar actually did commit sodomy.
I wish I could be as optimistic as many of our leaders, from both the BN and PR, appear to be when it comes to the justice system. But the fact is, it is hard to believe that Anwar will get a fair hearing, whether or not he actually committed anal rape.
This is the same fellow who has gone on the record accusing the current Inspector-General of Police and Defence Minister of shocking crimes; considering that some policemen are hard-pressed enough to accept bribes of RM2 (in coins), it is impossible to believe that Anwar will get fair and professional treatment from our police force. It is difficult to see how he will get a fair hearing with the shocking revelations from people like Anwar himself and Justice Ian Chin about the state of our judiciary.
A famous legal adage is that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done. We may not like it, but should the court of public opinion acquit Anwar in spite of a guilty verdict, the fault lies with our law enforcement and judicial institutions for failing to convince the public that he is guilty.
The honour and respectability of our institutions already lie in tatters. I hope we can come up with better smears and better conspiracy theories than the notion that Anwar is at the same time both calculatingly power-hungry and carelessly impatient. If our government wants to put forth a lie and put the final nail in our institutions' coffin, I hope they will at least be prudent enough to make it a good one; if they have found the truth, I hope they will be honest and wise enough to let our institutions and laws do their job, rather than make a mockery of the legal process.
John Lee is a second-year student of economics at Dartmouth College in the United States. He has been thinking aloud since 2005 at www.infernalramblings.com.
Press Statement by DSAI
http://nurulizzah.com/site/?p=159
Press Statement by DSAI
Archived in the category: Website
Posted by amita on 17 Jul 08 -
KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA; JULY 17, 2008
On Saturday, 12-07-2008, the police came to my house to serve a Section 111 Criminal Procedure Code notice, harassing my family and demanding my presence at the IPK Kuala Lumpur (Federal Territories Police headquarters) at 2pm on Monday, 14-07-2008 despite an earlier agreement with my lawyers for me to come to the IPK on Monday 14-07-2008. On the next day, Sunday, the police also served an ex-parte court order, prohibiting me from physically being within 5 km from the Parliament on Monday 14-07-2008. As you can see, my house and the IPK KL are within 5 km radius from the parliament building. The court order effectively put me under house arrest on Monday and at the same time prevented me from going to the IPK.
On Monday, 14-07-2008, the presence of police personnel outside the compound of my house strengthened our suspicions that they would be prepared to arrest me as soon as I left the compound of my residence, on the pretext of me violating the court order. The issue here, is which order should I comply with, the ex-parte court order or the Section 111 notice from the police?
On the same day, the police through the Investigating Officer, one DSP Jude Pereira wrote and faxed to my lawyer at about 1.06pm, informing that I was required to be present at the IPK KL on Wednesday, 16-07-2008 at 2.00 pm to assist with the investigation. I conveyed my agreement to the appointment and it was communicated to the police through my solicitor, Messrs S.N Nair and Partners via telephone and letter on the same day.
On Wednesday, 16-07-2008, I was at the Anti Corruption Agency (BPR) head office to record my statement pursuant to the police report lodged by me at IPK Shah Alam on 01-07-2008, against the Attorney General Gani Patail and the Inspector General of Police Musa Hassan for their involvement in the fabrication of evidence way back in 1998. To ensure that we will be able to attend the appointment with the police at 2pm, we cut short our statement at the BPR’s office, and this fact was clearly conveyed to the BPR officers present.
At about 12.45 pm, the IO, DSP Jude Pereira called Mr Nair to confirm about our attendance and Mr. Nair confirmed that we would attend that 2pm appointment. We were about to have a quick lunch at my house before proceeding to the IPK. 5 minutes later, we were ambushed by a team of masked and heavily armed police personnel near my house.
I was arrested and brought to the IPK. I cooperated fully with the police by giving my cautioned statement from 2.30 pm to about 7.30 pm. At this particular point, the IO and the other officers handling this case were doing their job professionally. I was then given assurances by Assistant Commissioner of Police Razali and later Senior Assistant Commissioner II Khor (through my lawyer) that I would be released on police bail on the same day.
However, later on, upon my return from Kuala Lumpur General Hospotal (HKL), the IO, DSP Jude Pereira informed me and my lawyers that I will be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight for the purpose of recording a further statement in the morning.
I and my lawyers protested, giving our undertaking that we will be back anytime required by the police to continue with the recording of the statement, and there was no need for me to be detained overnight, and that I should be released on police bail. The police, through the IO were adamant that I should be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight, despite them knowing about my physical condition. I had to spend the night sleeping on a cold cement floor, which aggravated my back injury which was due to the beating I received from the then IGP, Tan Sri Rahim Nor on 20th September, 1998.
This morning, after a short statement that was recorded for about 30 minutes, I was released on police bail. I was in pain and had to immediately receive some medical treatment upon my return home.
I now wish to deal with the statement of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) Director, Dato Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin as appeared in Utusan Malaysia today, inter alia
“Pasukan khas bertopeng polis terpaksa memintas kenderaan DSAI di Bukit Segambut di sini dan menahan Anwar ekoran tindakan Penasihat PKR itu mengubah haluan kenderaannya pada saat-saat tempoh yang diberi kepadanya untuk menyerah diri kepada polis pada pukul 2 petang ini hampir berakhir”
This is a blatant lie from the CID director to cover up their shameful act of abuse of police powers. I have given the assurances and had just informed the IO 5 minutes before the disgraceful ambush by the police through my lawyer who was with me in the same car.
In addition to the above, the Deputy Home Minister, Wan Farid said, as reported in Star Online that, I “went voluntarily to the police car without any incident.” Again, this is also a blatant lie by the government.
I take to task the IGP for this abuse of police power against me through the events I’ve narrated above. It appears that the events of the last few days, the nature of my unwarranted arrest, my overnight incarceration which was actually absolutely unnecessary, were an act of personal vengeance against me in retaliation to the reports I lodged earlier against him, which are now being investigated by the ACA.
DNA
I have reasonable grounds for having no confidence in the system. In the course of the trial of the false allegations of sodomy in 1998, DNA evidence was fabricated and used against me. The persons responsible for the fabrication then were the IGP, SAC Rodwan and the AG, are new key players in this investigation.
Until now, I have been denied access to the police report made by the accuser against me.
My accuser is still under police protection and as such, any fabrication is possible if they take my DNA. My decision to refuse a DNA test is taken through advice of my lawyers and DNA experts, both local and overseas.
ANWAR IBRAHIM
Press Statement by DSAI
Archived in the category: Website
Posted by amita on 17 Jul 08 -
KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA; JULY 17, 2008
On Saturday, 12-07-2008, the police came to my house to serve a Section 111 Criminal Procedure Code notice, harassing my family and demanding my presence at the IPK Kuala Lumpur (Federal Territories Police headquarters) at 2pm on Monday, 14-07-2008 despite an earlier agreement with my lawyers for me to come to the IPK on Monday 14-07-2008. On the next day, Sunday, the police also served an ex-parte court order, prohibiting me from physically being within 5 km from the Parliament on Monday 14-07-2008. As you can see, my house and the IPK KL are within 5 km radius from the parliament building. The court order effectively put me under house arrest on Monday and at the same time prevented me from going to the IPK.
On Monday, 14-07-2008, the presence of police personnel outside the compound of my house strengthened our suspicions that they would be prepared to arrest me as soon as I left the compound of my residence, on the pretext of me violating the court order. The issue here, is which order should I comply with, the ex-parte court order or the Section 111 notice from the police?
On the same day, the police through the Investigating Officer, one DSP Jude Pereira wrote and faxed to my lawyer at about 1.06pm, informing that I was required to be present at the IPK KL on Wednesday, 16-07-2008 at 2.00 pm to assist with the investigation. I conveyed my agreement to the appointment and it was communicated to the police through my solicitor, Messrs S.N Nair and Partners via telephone and letter on the same day.
On Wednesday, 16-07-2008, I was at the Anti Corruption Agency (BPR) head office to record my statement pursuant to the police report lodged by me at IPK Shah Alam on 01-07-2008, against the Attorney General Gani Patail and the Inspector General of Police Musa Hassan for their involvement in the fabrication of evidence way back in 1998. To ensure that we will be able to attend the appointment with the police at 2pm, we cut short our statement at the BPR’s office, and this fact was clearly conveyed to the BPR officers present.
At about 12.45 pm, the IO, DSP Jude Pereira called Mr Nair to confirm about our attendance and Mr. Nair confirmed that we would attend that 2pm appointment. We were about to have a quick lunch at my house before proceeding to the IPK. 5 minutes later, we were ambushed by a team of masked and heavily armed police personnel near my house.
I was arrested and brought to the IPK. I cooperated fully with the police by giving my cautioned statement from 2.30 pm to about 7.30 pm. At this particular point, the IO and the other officers handling this case were doing their job professionally. I was then given assurances by Assistant Commissioner of Police Razali and later Senior Assistant Commissioner II Khor (through my lawyer) that I would be released on police bail on the same day.
However, later on, upon my return from Kuala Lumpur General Hospotal (HKL), the IO, DSP Jude Pereira informed me and my lawyers that I will be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight for the purpose of recording a further statement in the morning.
I and my lawyers protested, giving our undertaking that we will be back anytime required by the police to continue with the recording of the statement, and there was no need for me to be detained overnight, and that I should be released on police bail. The police, through the IO were adamant that I should be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight, despite them knowing about my physical condition. I had to spend the night sleeping on a cold cement floor, which aggravated my back injury which was due to the beating I received from the then IGP, Tan Sri Rahim Nor on 20th September, 1998.
This morning, after a short statement that was recorded for about 30 minutes, I was released on police bail. I was in pain and had to immediately receive some medical treatment upon my return home.
I now wish to deal with the statement of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) Director, Dato Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin as appeared in Utusan Malaysia today, inter alia
“Pasukan khas bertopeng polis terpaksa memintas kenderaan DSAI di Bukit Segambut di sini dan menahan Anwar ekoran tindakan Penasihat PKR itu mengubah haluan kenderaannya pada saat-saat tempoh yang diberi kepadanya untuk menyerah diri kepada polis pada pukul 2 petang ini hampir berakhir”
This is a blatant lie from the CID director to cover up their shameful act of abuse of police powers. I have given the assurances and had just informed the IO 5 minutes before the disgraceful ambush by the police through my lawyer who was with me in the same car.
In addition to the above, the Deputy Home Minister, Wan Farid said, as reported in Star Online that, I “went voluntarily to the police car without any incident.” Again, this is also a blatant lie by the government.
I take to task the IGP for this abuse of police power against me through the events I’ve narrated above. It appears that the events of the last few days, the nature of my unwarranted arrest, my overnight incarceration which was actually absolutely unnecessary, were an act of personal vengeance against me in retaliation to the reports I lodged earlier against him, which are now being investigated by the ACA.
DNA
I have reasonable grounds for having no confidence in the system. In the course of the trial of the false allegations of sodomy in 1998, DNA evidence was fabricated and used against me. The persons responsible for the fabrication then were the IGP, SAC Rodwan and the AG, are new key players in this investigation.
Until now, I have been denied access to the police report made by the accuser against me.
My accuser is still under police protection and as such, any fabrication is possible if they take my DNA. My decision to refuse a DNA test is taken through advice of my lawyers and DNA experts, both local and overseas.
ANWAR IBRAHIM
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
OPEN LETTER CONCERNING DATUK SERI DR. ANWAR IBRAHIM
Under Islamic Law, accusations of this magnitude that are not substantiated by four eye-witnesses of impeccable character (such as did not occur neither with these accusations nor with the previous ones) incur severe legal punishment only for the accusers themselves.
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful
May Peace and Blessings be upon the Prophet Muhammad and his kin
“ … [M]ake peace between them justly, and act equitably. Lo! Allah loveth the equitable. / The believers are naught else than brothers. Therefore make peace between your brethren and observe your duty to Allah that perhaps ye may obtain mercy.” (The Holy Qur’an, Al-Hujurat, 49:9-10)
OPEN LETTER CONCERNING DATUK SERI DR. ANWAR IBRAHIM
Al-Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatuhu,
We, the undersigned, believe the honorable brother Datuk Seri Dr. Anwar Ibrahim to be of the highest ethical and moral integrity, a devout Muslim and a devoted father and husband. He is universally recognized as an advocate for justice and fairness, and he has a long history of promoting Islam and championing Islamic ethical and charitable causes.
We are deeply concerned about the physical safety and freedom of our respected brother Datuk Seri Dr. Anwar Ibrahim. We are troubled by the unsubstantiated and clearly scurrilous claims made against him and his character. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“O ye who believe! Shun much suspicion; for lo! some suspicion is a crime. And spy not, neither backbite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Ye abhor that (so abhor the other)! And keep your duty (to Allah). Lo! Allah is Relenting, Merciful.” (The Holy Qur’an, Al-Hujurat, 49:12)
Our beloved Malaysia is today one of the leading countries of the Muslim Ummah. It is an example of a successful modern Islamic country, and in many ways a model and example for other Muslim countries. This has been due to the Grace of Allah and then largely to the historical and invaluable efforts and contributions made by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammed and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi (among others). Every Muslim who knows anything about Malaysia is proud and appreciative of these efforts. Equally, every Muslim who knows Malaysian politics is appreciative of the formidable political courage in leadership exhibited by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammed during his time as Prime Minister of Malaysia and of the example of personal piety and forbearance that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi has given the Ummah today.
Indeed, perhaps precisely because of Malaysia’s prominence within the Ummah and the world, we would like to point out that the global Muslim community is paying close attention to the way our respected and honorable brother Dr. Anwar Ibrahim is treated. We have no wish to interfere in the internal politics of Malaysia, or in civil and criminal accusations within the country, which we reiterate are ultimately the business only of the Malaysian state and people. However, the spectacle, ten years ago, of our respected brother Datuk Seri Dr. Anwar Ibrahim sitting patiently in court after having been personally and illegally beaten up by then Police Chief of Malaysia is still fresh within our minds as a travesty of justice and impartiality under the law in a leading Muslim country. We are all still ashamed of that image, which will ever be indelibly engraved in our memories. So we remind our brothers in Malaysia that our beloved Prophet Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said that justice is the very goal of government in Islam. And Allah Himself says in the Holy Qur’an:
“Say: My Lord enjoineth justice …” (Al-A’raf, 7:29)
Thus we feel that we have a right — and indeed, an obligation under Islam — to strongly urge the Malaysian authorities to facilitate a swift, transparent and just resolution to this issue and resolutely ensure the safety, freedom and physical well-being of our honorable and respected brother Anwar Ibrahim. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“The Truth is from thy Lord (O Muhammad), so be not thou of those who waver.” (Al-Baqarah, 2:147)
Moreover, given the political implications of the timing of this latest incident; given the political undertones of the previous incidents of similar accusations made in 1998 — which led to the wrongful incarceration of Dr. Anwar Ibrahim for six years, and that have since been publicly refuted in the highest Malaysian court of law — and given the proven questionable nature of the authorities involved in the investigation, we feel morally obliged to also state our deep concern about the prospects of true justice for Anwar Ibrahim in the current authorities in the police and prosecution departments (whose leadership was personally involved in Dr. Anwar Ibrahim’s previous unjust accusations) without deliberate, careful, impartial and independent political oversight. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“Lo! Allah enjoineth justice and kindness, and giving to kinsfolk, and forbiddeth lewdness and abomination and wickedness. He exhorteth you in order that ye may take heed.” (Al-Nahl, 16:90)
Finally, we are morally obliged as Muslims to also point out that our religion and our beloved Prophet Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) regard false accusations in these matters to be of extremely grave consequence. In fact, under Islamic Law, accusations of this magnitude that are not substantiated by four eye-witnesses of impeccable character (such as did not occur neither with these accusations nor with the previous ones) incur severe legal punishment only for the accusers themselves. Perhaps what is most insidious and disturbing, however, is the likely malevolent and slanderous intent behind these attacks on the moral character of our brother Dr. Anwar Ibrahim. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“When ye welcomed it with your tongues, and uttered with your mouths that whereof ye had no knowledge, ye counted it a trifle. In the sight of Allah it is very great. / Wherefor, when ye heard it, said ye not: It is not for us to speak of this. Glory be to Thee (O Allah)! This is awful calumny. / Allah admonisheth you that ye repeat not the like thereof ever, if ye are (in truth) believers.” (The Holy Qur’an, Surat Al-Nur, 24:15-17)
However, we have complete trust in Allah and so remain hopeful that the highest political authorities in Malaysia will, in sha Allah, secure an honest and just outcome to this deeply troubling situation. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“Let there arise from you a band of people who invite to goodness, and enjoin right conduct and forbid wrong. Such are they who are successful.” (Aal-‘Imran, 3:104)
Wal-Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatuhu.
Click here to endorse the open letter
Signed by (in Alphabetical Order of First Names):
Dr. Abubaker Al-Shingieti
President, American Muslims for Constructive Engagement (AMCE)
Prof. Dr. Akbar Ahmed
Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies, American University, Washington DC; Former Pakistani High Commissioner to the UK
Shaykh Al-Habib Ali Zain Al-Abidin Al-Jifri
Founder and Director, Taba Institute, United Arab Emirates
Mr. M. Ali Lakhani
Founder and Editor of Sacred Web: A Journal of Tradition and Modernity, Canada
Dr. Anas Al-Shaikh-Ali
Chair, Association of Muslim Social Scientists UK
Academic Advisor, International Institute of Islamic Thought, London
Ms. Amina Rasul
Lead Convenor, Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy, Mandaluyong City, Philippines
Prof. Dr. Aref Ali Nayed
Muslim Scholar, Libya; Senior Advisor, Cambridge Interfaith Program, Faculty of Divinity, Cambridge University; Former Professor, Institute for Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Asst. Prof. Dr. Caner Dagli
College of the Holy Cross, Worcester MA, USA
H.E. Shaykh Prof. Dr. Mustafa Cerić
Grand Mufti and Head of Ulema of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Prof. Dr. Din Syamsuddin
President, Central Board of Muhammadiyah, Indonesia
Mr. Eboo Patel
Founder and Executive Director, Interfaith Youth Core, USA
Ms. Farah El-Sharif
President, Muslim Students Association, Georgetown University, USA
Shaykh Faraz Rabbani
Hanafi Scholar; Instructor, The Razi Institute, Canada
Dr. Faroque Khan
Chairman, Islamic Center of Long Island, NY, USA
Prof. Dr. H.R.H. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal
Chairman of the Board of the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, Jordan
Shaykh Salih bin Sultan Ghalib Al-Quaiti
Hadramaut, Yemen
Mr. Hasan (Charles) Le Gai Eaton
Writer on Islam, UK
Dr. Ibrahim Kalin
Director, SETA Foundation, Ankara, Turkey; Asst. Prof. Georgetown University, USA
Prof. Dr. Ingrid Mattson
President, The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)
Dr. Jamal Barzinji
Vice-President, International Institute of Islamic Thought, USA
Dr. Jonathan Brown
Assistant Professor, University of Washington, USA
Dr. Marve Kavakci
The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA
Dr. Mohammad Fadel
Assistant Professor of Law, University of Toronto, Canada
Dr. Mohamed Bechari
President of the National Federation of Muslims of France (FNMF); Secretary-General of The Islamic European conference (EIC/CIE); Vice-President of the Foundation of Islamic Works of France (FOI); President-Rector de of the Avicenna Institute (IASH), France
Mohamed H. Marei
Founder and Director, Qasid Institute, Jordan
Hafiz Moez Masoud
Host of Al-Tariq Al-Sah television show, Cairo, Egypt
H.E. Amb. Dr. Murad Hofmann
Author and Muslim Intellectual, Germany
Mr. Musa Saket
Chairman of the Board, Al-Salam Audio Media (Hayat Fm), Jordan
Prof. Dr. Mustapha Cherif
Muslims Intellectual; Former Minister of Higher Education and Former Ambassador, Algeria
Prof. Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqui
Islamic Scholar and Theologian; Chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, USA
Dr. Nabil El-Sharif
Editor- in-Chief, Al-Dustour Daily Newspaper, Jordan
Mr. Nihad Awad
National Executive Director, Co-Founder
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), USA
Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller
Author and Educator, Jordan
Dr. Seyyed Reza Shah-Kazemi
Author and Muslim Scholar, UK
H.E. Prof. Dr. Rusmir Mahmutcehajic
Professor, Sarajevo University; President of the International Forum Bosnia; Former Vice President of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Dr. Sayyid Syeed
ISNA Secretary-General, USA
Mr. Sohail Nakhooda
Editor-in-Chief, Islamica Magazine
Prof. Dr. Sulayman S. Nyang
Howard University, USA
Dr. Tawfik Awji
Beirut Islamic University, Lebanon
Dr. Yusuf Islam
Composer and Philanthropist, Islamia Schools Trust, London, UK
Dr. Yousuf Zia Kavakci
Director Islamic Association of Northern Texas and Member Fiqh Council of North America.
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful
May Peace and Blessings be upon the Prophet Muhammad and his kin
“ … [M]ake peace between them justly, and act equitably. Lo! Allah loveth the equitable. / The believers are naught else than brothers. Therefore make peace between your brethren and observe your duty to Allah that perhaps ye may obtain mercy.” (The Holy Qur’an, Al-Hujurat, 49:9-10)
OPEN LETTER CONCERNING DATUK SERI DR. ANWAR IBRAHIM
Al-Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatuhu,
We, the undersigned, believe the honorable brother Datuk Seri Dr. Anwar Ibrahim to be of the highest ethical and moral integrity, a devout Muslim and a devoted father and husband. He is universally recognized as an advocate for justice and fairness, and he has a long history of promoting Islam and championing Islamic ethical and charitable causes.
We are deeply concerned about the physical safety and freedom of our respected brother Datuk Seri Dr. Anwar Ibrahim. We are troubled by the unsubstantiated and clearly scurrilous claims made against him and his character. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“O ye who believe! Shun much suspicion; for lo! some suspicion is a crime. And spy not, neither backbite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Ye abhor that (so abhor the other)! And keep your duty (to Allah). Lo! Allah is Relenting, Merciful.” (The Holy Qur’an, Al-Hujurat, 49:12)
Our beloved Malaysia is today one of the leading countries of the Muslim Ummah. It is an example of a successful modern Islamic country, and in many ways a model and example for other Muslim countries. This has been due to the Grace of Allah and then largely to the historical and invaluable efforts and contributions made by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammed and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi (among others). Every Muslim who knows anything about Malaysia is proud and appreciative of these efforts. Equally, every Muslim who knows Malaysian politics is appreciative of the formidable political courage in leadership exhibited by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammed during his time as Prime Minister of Malaysia and of the example of personal piety and forbearance that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi has given the Ummah today.
Indeed, perhaps precisely because of Malaysia’s prominence within the Ummah and the world, we would like to point out that the global Muslim community is paying close attention to the way our respected and honorable brother Dr. Anwar Ibrahim is treated. We have no wish to interfere in the internal politics of Malaysia, or in civil and criminal accusations within the country, which we reiterate are ultimately the business only of the Malaysian state and people. However, the spectacle, ten years ago, of our respected brother Datuk Seri Dr. Anwar Ibrahim sitting patiently in court after having been personally and illegally beaten up by then Police Chief of Malaysia is still fresh within our minds as a travesty of justice and impartiality under the law in a leading Muslim country. We are all still ashamed of that image, which will ever be indelibly engraved in our memories. So we remind our brothers in Malaysia that our beloved Prophet Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said that justice is the very goal of government in Islam. And Allah Himself says in the Holy Qur’an:
“Say: My Lord enjoineth justice …” (Al-A’raf, 7:29)
Thus we feel that we have a right — and indeed, an obligation under Islam — to strongly urge the Malaysian authorities to facilitate a swift, transparent and just resolution to this issue and resolutely ensure the safety, freedom and physical well-being of our honorable and respected brother Anwar Ibrahim. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“The Truth is from thy Lord (O Muhammad), so be not thou of those who waver.” (Al-Baqarah, 2:147)
Moreover, given the political implications of the timing of this latest incident; given the political undertones of the previous incidents of similar accusations made in 1998 — which led to the wrongful incarceration of Dr. Anwar Ibrahim for six years, and that have since been publicly refuted in the highest Malaysian court of law — and given the proven questionable nature of the authorities involved in the investigation, we feel morally obliged to also state our deep concern about the prospects of true justice for Anwar Ibrahim in the current authorities in the police and prosecution departments (whose leadership was personally involved in Dr. Anwar Ibrahim’s previous unjust accusations) without deliberate, careful, impartial and independent political oversight. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“Lo! Allah enjoineth justice and kindness, and giving to kinsfolk, and forbiddeth lewdness and abomination and wickedness. He exhorteth you in order that ye may take heed.” (Al-Nahl, 16:90)
Finally, we are morally obliged as Muslims to also point out that our religion and our beloved Prophet Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) regard false accusations in these matters to be of extremely grave consequence. In fact, under Islamic Law, accusations of this magnitude that are not substantiated by four eye-witnesses of impeccable character (such as did not occur neither with these accusations nor with the previous ones) incur severe legal punishment only for the accusers themselves. Perhaps what is most insidious and disturbing, however, is the likely malevolent and slanderous intent behind these attacks on the moral character of our brother Dr. Anwar Ibrahim. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“When ye welcomed it with your tongues, and uttered with your mouths that whereof ye had no knowledge, ye counted it a trifle. In the sight of Allah it is very great. / Wherefor, when ye heard it, said ye not: It is not for us to speak of this. Glory be to Thee (O Allah)! This is awful calumny. / Allah admonisheth you that ye repeat not the like thereof ever, if ye are (in truth) believers.” (The Holy Qur’an, Surat Al-Nur, 24:15-17)
However, we have complete trust in Allah and so remain hopeful that the highest political authorities in Malaysia will, in sha Allah, secure an honest and just outcome to this deeply troubling situation. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
“Let there arise from you a band of people who invite to goodness, and enjoin right conduct and forbid wrong. Such are they who are successful.” (Aal-‘Imran, 3:104)
Wal-Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatuhu.
Click here to endorse the open letter
Signed by (in Alphabetical Order of First Names):
Dr. Abubaker Al-Shingieti
President, American Muslims for Constructive Engagement (AMCE)
Prof. Dr. Akbar Ahmed
Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies, American University, Washington DC; Former Pakistani High Commissioner to the UK
Shaykh Al-Habib Ali Zain Al-Abidin Al-Jifri
Founder and Director, Taba Institute, United Arab Emirates
Mr. M. Ali Lakhani
Founder and Editor of Sacred Web: A Journal of Tradition and Modernity, Canada
Dr. Anas Al-Shaikh-Ali
Chair, Association of Muslim Social Scientists UK
Academic Advisor, International Institute of Islamic Thought, London
Ms. Amina Rasul
Lead Convenor, Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy, Mandaluyong City, Philippines
Prof. Dr. Aref Ali Nayed
Muslim Scholar, Libya; Senior Advisor, Cambridge Interfaith Program, Faculty of Divinity, Cambridge University; Former Professor, Institute for Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Asst. Prof. Dr. Caner Dagli
College of the Holy Cross, Worcester MA, USA
H.E. Shaykh Prof. Dr. Mustafa Cerić
Grand Mufti and Head of Ulema of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Prof. Dr. Din Syamsuddin
President, Central Board of Muhammadiyah, Indonesia
Mr. Eboo Patel
Founder and Executive Director, Interfaith Youth Core, USA
Ms. Farah El-Sharif
President, Muslim Students Association, Georgetown University, USA
Shaykh Faraz Rabbani
Hanafi Scholar; Instructor, The Razi Institute, Canada
Dr. Faroque Khan
Chairman, Islamic Center of Long Island, NY, USA
Prof. Dr. H.R.H. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal
Chairman of the Board of the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, Jordan
Shaykh Salih bin Sultan Ghalib Al-Quaiti
Hadramaut, Yemen
Mr. Hasan (Charles) Le Gai Eaton
Writer on Islam, UK
Dr. Ibrahim Kalin
Director, SETA Foundation, Ankara, Turkey; Asst. Prof. Georgetown University, USA
Prof. Dr. Ingrid Mattson
President, The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)
Dr. Jamal Barzinji
Vice-President, International Institute of Islamic Thought, USA
Dr. Jonathan Brown
Assistant Professor, University of Washington, USA
Dr. Marve Kavakci
The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA
Dr. Mohammad Fadel
Assistant Professor of Law, University of Toronto, Canada
Dr. Mohamed Bechari
President of the National Federation of Muslims of France (FNMF); Secretary-General of The Islamic European conference (EIC/CIE); Vice-President of the Foundation of Islamic Works of France (FOI); President-Rector de of the Avicenna Institute (IASH), France
Mohamed H. Marei
Founder and Director, Qasid Institute, Jordan
Hafiz Moez Masoud
Host of Al-Tariq Al-Sah television show, Cairo, Egypt
H.E. Amb. Dr. Murad Hofmann
Author and Muslim Intellectual, Germany
Mr. Musa Saket
Chairman of the Board, Al-Salam Audio Media (Hayat Fm), Jordan
Prof. Dr. Mustapha Cherif
Muslims Intellectual; Former Minister of Higher Education and Former Ambassador, Algeria
Prof. Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqui
Islamic Scholar and Theologian; Chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, USA
Dr. Nabil El-Sharif
Editor- in-Chief, Al-Dustour Daily Newspaper, Jordan
Mr. Nihad Awad
National Executive Director, Co-Founder
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), USA
Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller
Author and Educator, Jordan
Dr. Seyyed Reza Shah-Kazemi
Author and Muslim Scholar, UK
H.E. Prof. Dr. Rusmir Mahmutcehajic
Professor, Sarajevo University; President of the International Forum Bosnia; Former Vice President of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Dr. Sayyid Syeed
ISNA Secretary-General, USA
Mr. Sohail Nakhooda
Editor-in-Chief, Islamica Magazine
Prof. Dr. Sulayman S. Nyang
Howard University, USA
Dr. Tawfik Awji
Beirut Islamic University, Lebanon
Dr. Yusuf Islam
Composer and Philanthropist, Islamia Schools Trust, London, UK
Dr. Yousuf Zia Kavakci
Director Islamic Association of Northern Texas and Member Fiqh Council of North America.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Enter the new sodomy charge. Anwar calls it “frivolous and nonsensical”
Enter the new sodomy charge. Anwar calls it “frivolous and nonsensical” and lays the blame at Najib’s door. It may be frivolous, but we’ve seen what the Malaysian authorities have done with frivolous charges before.
The Philippines Daily Inquirer
DOWN BUT NOT OUT: Anwar Ibrahim is escorted by prison guards out of the Palace of Justice courthouse in Putrajaya before it declared him a free man on 2 Sept 2004. (Photo courtesy: AFP)
Power tends to corrupt, and in the Philippines as in other countries it tends to corrupt especially when it comes under threat. Consider the unfortunate Anwar Ibrahim. The once and future rising star of Malaysian politics, Anwar is now facing, for the second time in 10 years, politically motivated charges of sodomy—a crime in Malaysia, punishable by as much as 20 years in prison. This is the same charge which sent Anwar, once Mahathir Mohamad’s deputy prime minister and now the leader of the opposition to Mahathir’s chosen successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, to jail on a nine-year term.
It has been hurled yet again at Anwar for only one reason: to derail his political career. The first case effectively shut him out of politics in the last years of Mahathir’s increasingly autocratic rule; it is obvious that the second case is meant to sideline him from politics again, at a time of increased vulnerability for Abdullah.
Contrary to the ruling coalition’s fondest hopes, Anwar recovered from the ignominy of a sodomy conviction and assumed the leadership of a revitalised opposition. Last March, the opposition coalition rattled the political foundations of Malaysia, winning five of 13 state governments and almost capturing control of parliament.
"We will not await the results of their investigation with bated breath."
The opposition’s victories come at a time of great stress for the governing National Front coalition and the dominant United Malays Nationalist Organisation (Umno) party; they are weighed down by Abdullah’s unpopularity (a member of the ruling coalition had even proposed a vote of no confidence in parliament), a sensational murder case into which the name of deputy prime minister Najib Razak has been dragged, even the investigation of Mahathir on the matter of judicial appointments. Taken together with the stunning results of the March general election, the ruling coalition is in the worst shape it’s ever been in since the country was founded in 1957.
Enter the new sodomy charge. Anwar calls it “frivolous and nonsensical” and lays the blame at Najib’s door. It may be frivolous, but we’ve seen what the Malaysian authorities have done with frivolous charges before. The police say it will investigate the charge - but this is the same police who fabricated the first charge and beat Anwar when he was in jail.
We will not await the results of their investigation with bated breath.
The international community sees through this charade, and we hope the majority of Malaysians do too. The filing of the new charge is a corruption, a deliberate abuse, of the justice system—unfortunately an official crime we are all too familiar with here in the Philippines.
Indeed, it is our sorry experience with the politicisation of the administration of justice under Philippine justice secretary Raul Gonzalez and interior secretary Ronaldo Puno that allows us to recognise, with a dawning sense of horror, exactly what is happening to the leader of the Malaysian opposition. The authorities, unnerved by the prospect of a change in power, have Anwar in their sights.
Anwar is a friend of the Philippines, an avid student of Rizal and an articulate voice of moderate Islam. Like Ninoy Aquino, he has been given the opportunity to suffer for his political convictions. His years in jail, too, included subtle and overt forms of abuse. (He had to wear a neck brace once because of a beating he endured in prison.) In other words, he is that unusual Asean politician: a martyr, and thus someone whom Filipinos can readily relate to. We also believe he will continue Malaysia’s policy of strongly supporting the peace process that seeks to find a resolution to the Moro secessionist struggle.
But regardless of whether he will become prime minister or not, he does not deserve the indignity of another trumped-up charge. Indeed, Malaysia itself deserves better.
The Philippines Daily Inquirer
DOWN BUT NOT OUT: Anwar Ibrahim is escorted by prison guards out of the Palace of Justice courthouse in Putrajaya before it declared him a free man on 2 Sept 2004. (Photo courtesy: AFP)
Power tends to corrupt, and in the Philippines as in other countries it tends to corrupt especially when it comes under threat. Consider the unfortunate Anwar Ibrahim. The once and future rising star of Malaysian politics, Anwar is now facing, for the second time in 10 years, politically motivated charges of sodomy—a crime in Malaysia, punishable by as much as 20 years in prison. This is the same charge which sent Anwar, once Mahathir Mohamad’s deputy prime minister and now the leader of the opposition to Mahathir’s chosen successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, to jail on a nine-year term.
It has been hurled yet again at Anwar for only one reason: to derail his political career. The first case effectively shut him out of politics in the last years of Mahathir’s increasingly autocratic rule; it is obvious that the second case is meant to sideline him from politics again, at a time of increased vulnerability for Abdullah.
Contrary to the ruling coalition’s fondest hopes, Anwar recovered from the ignominy of a sodomy conviction and assumed the leadership of a revitalised opposition. Last March, the opposition coalition rattled the political foundations of Malaysia, winning five of 13 state governments and almost capturing control of parliament.
"We will not await the results of their investigation with bated breath."
The opposition’s victories come at a time of great stress for the governing National Front coalition and the dominant United Malays Nationalist Organisation (Umno) party; they are weighed down by Abdullah’s unpopularity (a member of the ruling coalition had even proposed a vote of no confidence in parliament), a sensational murder case into which the name of deputy prime minister Najib Razak has been dragged, even the investigation of Mahathir on the matter of judicial appointments. Taken together with the stunning results of the March general election, the ruling coalition is in the worst shape it’s ever been in since the country was founded in 1957.
Enter the new sodomy charge. Anwar calls it “frivolous and nonsensical” and lays the blame at Najib’s door. It may be frivolous, but we’ve seen what the Malaysian authorities have done with frivolous charges before. The police say it will investigate the charge - but this is the same police who fabricated the first charge and beat Anwar when he was in jail.
We will not await the results of their investigation with bated breath.
The international community sees through this charade, and we hope the majority of Malaysians do too. The filing of the new charge is a corruption, a deliberate abuse, of the justice system—unfortunately an official crime we are all too familiar with here in the Philippines.
Indeed, it is our sorry experience with the politicisation of the administration of justice under Philippine justice secretary Raul Gonzalez and interior secretary Ronaldo Puno that allows us to recognise, with a dawning sense of horror, exactly what is happening to the leader of the Malaysian opposition. The authorities, unnerved by the prospect of a change in power, have Anwar in their sights.
Anwar is a friend of the Philippines, an avid student of Rizal and an articulate voice of moderate Islam. Like Ninoy Aquino, he has been given the opportunity to suffer for his political convictions. His years in jail, too, included subtle and overt forms of abuse. (He had to wear a neck brace once because of a beating he endured in prison.) In other words, he is that unusual Asean politician: a martyr, and thus someone whom Filipinos can readily relate to. We also believe he will continue Malaysia’s policy of strongly supporting the peace process that seeks to find a resolution to the Moro secessionist struggle.
But regardless of whether he will become prime minister or not, he does not deserve the indignity of another trumped-up charge. Indeed, Malaysia itself deserves better.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Fatwa Dr Taha Jabir al-'Ulwani mengenai fitnah terhadap Anwar Ibrahim
Fatwa Dr Taha Jabir al-'Ulwani mengenai fitnah terhadap Anwar Ibrahim
Terjemahan Ustaz Zainuddin Hashim
Wed | Jul 09, 08 | 4:43:07 pm MYT
Soalan
Telah berlaku satu isu yang menggemparkan banyak pihak di Malaysia baru-baru ini, berhubung mantan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang dituduh terlibat dengan perlakuan liwat, pihak berkuasa Malaysia berusaha untuk memanggil kedua-dua individu yang menuduh dan dituduh agar melakukan angkat sumpah untuk membuktikan pihak yang benar dan salah.
Apa pandangan Islam berhubung tindakan angkat sumpah berkenaan, apakah pihak yang dituduh perlu berbuat demikian bagi membersihkan dirinya daripada fitnah atau tuduhan itu seperti sumpahan orang yang terlibat dalam kes pembunuhan?
Jawapan Dr Taha Jabir al-'Ulwani:
Menurut Imam Ibnu al-Qaiyim al-Jauziyah dalam kitabnya at-Turuq al-Hukmiyyah dan beberapa pandangan ulama, mereka menolak dakwaan atau tuduhan yang datang daripada seorang yang dilihat tidak berlaku adil, khususnya daripada setiap tindakan, cara hidup terhadap orang yang mempunyai kedudukan baik dalam masyarakat, di mana dakwaan seumpama itu disifatkan sebagai 'Qazaf' dengan membawa empat orang saksi, ia bersandarkan kepada ayat 4, Surah an-Nur maksudnya:
4. "Dan orang-orang yang melemparkan tuduhan (zina) kepada perempuan yang terpelihara kehormatannya, kemudian mereka tidak membawakan empat orang saksi, maka sebatlah mereka delapan puluh kali sebat; dan janganlah kamu menerima persaksian mereka itu selama-lamanya; kerana mereka adalah orang-orang yang fasik;
Firman Allah lagi menerusi ayat 11-19, Surah an-Nur maksudnya:
"11. Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang membawa berita yang amat dusta itu ialah segolongan dari kalangan kamu; janganlah kamu menyangka (berita yang dusta) itu buruk bagi kamu, bahkan ia baik bagi kamu. tiap-tiap seorang di antara mereka akan beroleh hukuman sepadan dengan kesalahan yang dilakukannya itu, dan orang yang mengambil bahagian besar dalam menyiarkannya di antara mereka, akan beroleh siksa yang besar (di dunia dan di akhirat).
Sepatutnya semasa kamu mendengar tuduhan itu, orang-orang yang beriman - lelaki dan perempuan, menaruh baik sangka kepada diri (orang-orang) mereka sendiri. dan berkata: "Ini ialah tuduhan dusta yang nyata.
Sepatutnya mereka (yang menuduh) membawa empat orang saksi membuktikan tuduhan itu. oleh kerana mereka tidak mendatangkan empat orang saksi, maka mereka itu pada sisi hukum Allah, adalah orang-orang yang dusta.
Dan kalaulah tidak kerana adanya limpah kurnia Allah dan rahmatNya kepada kamu di dunia dan di akhirat, tentulah kamu dikenakan azab siksa yang besar disebabkan kamu turut campur dalam berita palsu itu; -
Iaitu semasa kamu bertanya atau menceritakan berita dusta itu dengan lidah kamu, dan memperkatakan dengan mulut kamu akan sesuatu yang kamu tidak mempunyai pengetahuan yang sah mengenainya; dan kamu pula menyangkanya perkara kecil, pada hal ia pada sisi hukum Allah adalah perkara yang besar dosanya.
Dan sepatutnya semasa kamu mendengarnya, kamu segera berkata: "Tidaklah layak bagi Kami memperkatakan hal ini! Maha suci Engkau (Ya Allah dari mencemarkan nama baik ahli Rumah Rasulullah)! ini adalah satu dusta besar yang mengejutkan".
Allah memberi pengajaran kepada kamu, supaya kamu tidak mengulangi perbuatan yang sedemikian ini selama-lamanya, jika betul kamu orang-orang yang beriman.
Dan Allah menjelaskan kepada kamu ayat-ayat keterangan (hukum-hukumNya); kerana Allah Maha Mengetahui, lagi Maha Bijaksana.
Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang suka terhebah tuduhan-tuduhan yang buruk dalam kalangan orang-orang yang beriman, mereka akan beroleh azab siksa yang tidak terperi sakitnya di dunia dan di akhirat; dan (ingatlah) Allah mengetahui (segala perkara) sedang kamu tidak mengetahui (yang demikian)."
Sesungguhnya sejarah gerakan Athisme dan Komunisme di dunia Arab secara khusus melatih perkaderan di peringkat akar umbi untuk menonjolkan akhlak yang songsang yang dilemparkan terhadap pimpinan ahli agama Islam yang komited dengannya, ia adalah cara untuk memburukkan nama baik dan imej mereka kepada umum (kerana mahu meraih kepentingan tertentu) agar umum tidak lagi percaya dan memberi sokongan kepada ahli-ahli agama, inilah yang pernah dilakukan oleh pengikut Komunis di Iraq satu ketika dahulu di kalangan parti Ba?ath (Kebangsaan Arab).
Justeru, kita amat rasa sedih apa yang sedang berlaku di Malaysia sekarang ini di mana para pemimpin kerajaan bertindak serupa dengan apa yang pernah berlaku di Iraq, mereka lakukan itu adalah semata-mata untuk kepentingan politik kotor mereka dan menyekat kemaraan pengaruh lawan dengan apa sahaja cara sekali pun walaupun melibatkan harga diri seseorang.
Mereka ini bukanlah pemimpin kerajaan yang baik yang boleh menjaga kebaikan dan kemaslahatan negara, tetapi untuk diri mereka semata-mata, tapi bagaimanapun tindakan mereka itu akan dibalas, kalau pun tidak pada diri mereka, mungkin isteri serta anak-anak mereka.
Apa yang umum hingga di peringkat global mengetahui, bahawa Saudara Anwar Ibrahim sejak masa mudanya dilantik sebagai ketua gerakan belia di Malaysia (ABIM), pernah mengurus kira-kira 25 buah sekolah beraliran agama khusus buat remaja lelaki dan perempuan (sekolah alternatif) di seluruh tanahair, tidak kedengaran pada usia remajanya atau ketika memimpin gerakan belia, sesuatu yang menjatuhkan harga diri atau maruahnya dengan tindakan yang menyalahi ajaran agama Islam. Jika pada usia begitu beliau disenangi, dipercayai dan dihormati sebagai seorang pemimpin yang baik, bagaiman mungkin pada usia yang mencecah 60 akan terlibat dengan perlakuan kaum Lut?.
Beliau sekarang ini terdedah kepada pelbagai ancaman, konspirasi, provokasi, bagi mengekalkan amalan politik kotor sekali gus mengajak manusia seluruhnya untuk menentang Allah SWT.
Isu akuan bersumpah sebenarnya tidak dibahaskan panjang lebar oleh kalangan fuqaha? melainkan pada keadaan bila wujudnya pembunuhan antara dua kampung hingga tidak dapat dikenal pasti siapa pembunuh sebenar, maka menurut sebahagian mereka: Akuan bersumpah hendaklah dilakukan oleh 50 orang ahli setiap kampung bagi membersihkan diri daripada sebarang tuduhan, tetapi ia bukan dalam isu yang sedang dibincangkan iaitu ?Qazaf?.
Ini kerana apa yang sedang disaksikan ialah isu antara seorang penuduh fasiq lagi zalim tidak diterima kesaksiaannya dan seorang yang teraniaya dan bersih daripada tuduhan tetapi tidak diberi haknya untuk membebaskan diri daripadanya.
Isu ini serupa apa yang pernah berlaku kepada pemimpin gerakan Islam Iraq al-marhum Syeikh Muhammad Mahmud as-Sowaf dan Syeikh Abdul Aziz al-Badri yang dilemparkan oleh pengikut Komunis dengan pelbagai dakwaan dan tuduhan hingga kedua-dua mereka tidaK dapat membela diri untuk membersihkan nama baik dan maruah.
Isu Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang pernah cemerlang dalam kepimpinannya ketika menerajui Kementerian Belia dan Sukan dan Ketua Pergerakan Pemuda Umno beberapa tahun, tidak kedengaran suara-suara sumbang daripada golongan remaja, belia bersamanya dahulu menyebut tentang perlakuan sumbang beliau, tetapi bagaimana sejak akhir-akhir ini terdapat kecenderungan pihak tertentu dengan rasa tidak malu dan takut kepada Allah melemparkan tuduhan negatif itu.
Saya menyeru pihak terbabit secara jujur, bertakwalah kamu kepada Allah, takutkan akan Dia Yang Maha Bertindak Balas ke atas hamba-hambaNya di akhirat, ingatlah ketegasan Allah dalam al-Quran : Sesungguhnnya hari tersebut (kiamat) tidak akan memberi manfaat harta dan anak-pinak, melainkan mereka yang datang menemui Allah dengan hati yang selamat (dari sebarang penyakit hati yang merbahaya).
Secara peribadi selaku seorang muslim, harapan dan seruan saya kepada Kerajaan Malaysia, agar bertakwa kepada Allah dalam mengurus negara dan rakyat, khususnya orang Melayu/Islam, berakhlaklah dengan nilai akhlak Islam yang murni, dengan tidak melebihkan politik daripada akhlak, jangan bertindak sesuatu yang boleh melucutkan harga diri seseorang atau rakyat hilang keyakinan para pemimpin yang memerintah negara sekarang ini, kerana setiap sesuatu yang zalim itu adalah jalan kegelapan, yang rosak itu akan membawa kepada neraka yang membakar.
Kita bermohon kepada Allah agar Dia memelihara negara dan rakyat di bawah naungan-Nya. - mr_
Terjemahan Ustaz Zainuddin Hashim
Wed | Jul 09, 08 | 4:43:07 pm MYT
Soalan
Telah berlaku satu isu yang menggemparkan banyak pihak di Malaysia baru-baru ini, berhubung mantan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang dituduh terlibat dengan perlakuan liwat, pihak berkuasa Malaysia berusaha untuk memanggil kedua-dua individu yang menuduh dan dituduh agar melakukan angkat sumpah untuk membuktikan pihak yang benar dan salah.
Apa pandangan Islam berhubung tindakan angkat sumpah berkenaan, apakah pihak yang dituduh perlu berbuat demikian bagi membersihkan dirinya daripada fitnah atau tuduhan itu seperti sumpahan orang yang terlibat dalam kes pembunuhan?
Jawapan Dr Taha Jabir al-'Ulwani:
Menurut Imam Ibnu al-Qaiyim al-Jauziyah dalam kitabnya at-Turuq al-Hukmiyyah dan beberapa pandangan ulama, mereka menolak dakwaan atau tuduhan yang datang daripada seorang yang dilihat tidak berlaku adil, khususnya daripada setiap tindakan, cara hidup terhadap orang yang mempunyai kedudukan baik dalam masyarakat, di mana dakwaan seumpama itu disifatkan sebagai 'Qazaf' dengan membawa empat orang saksi, ia bersandarkan kepada ayat 4, Surah an-Nur maksudnya:
4. "Dan orang-orang yang melemparkan tuduhan (zina) kepada perempuan yang terpelihara kehormatannya, kemudian mereka tidak membawakan empat orang saksi, maka sebatlah mereka delapan puluh kali sebat; dan janganlah kamu menerima persaksian mereka itu selama-lamanya; kerana mereka adalah orang-orang yang fasik;
Firman Allah lagi menerusi ayat 11-19, Surah an-Nur maksudnya:
"11. Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang membawa berita yang amat dusta itu ialah segolongan dari kalangan kamu; janganlah kamu menyangka (berita yang dusta) itu buruk bagi kamu, bahkan ia baik bagi kamu. tiap-tiap seorang di antara mereka akan beroleh hukuman sepadan dengan kesalahan yang dilakukannya itu, dan orang yang mengambil bahagian besar dalam menyiarkannya di antara mereka, akan beroleh siksa yang besar (di dunia dan di akhirat).
Sepatutnya semasa kamu mendengar tuduhan itu, orang-orang yang beriman - lelaki dan perempuan, menaruh baik sangka kepada diri (orang-orang) mereka sendiri. dan berkata: "Ini ialah tuduhan dusta yang nyata.
Sepatutnya mereka (yang menuduh) membawa empat orang saksi membuktikan tuduhan itu. oleh kerana mereka tidak mendatangkan empat orang saksi, maka mereka itu pada sisi hukum Allah, adalah orang-orang yang dusta.
Dan kalaulah tidak kerana adanya limpah kurnia Allah dan rahmatNya kepada kamu di dunia dan di akhirat, tentulah kamu dikenakan azab siksa yang besar disebabkan kamu turut campur dalam berita palsu itu; -
Iaitu semasa kamu bertanya atau menceritakan berita dusta itu dengan lidah kamu, dan memperkatakan dengan mulut kamu akan sesuatu yang kamu tidak mempunyai pengetahuan yang sah mengenainya; dan kamu pula menyangkanya perkara kecil, pada hal ia pada sisi hukum Allah adalah perkara yang besar dosanya.
Dan sepatutnya semasa kamu mendengarnya, kamu segera berkata: "Tidaklah layak bagi Kami memperkatakan hal ini! Maha suci Engkau (Ya Allah dari mencemarkan nama baik ahli Rumah Rasulullah)! ini adalah satu dusta besar yang mengejutkan".
Allah memberi pengajaran kepada kamu, supaya kamu tidak mengulangi perbuatan yang sedemikian ini selama-lamanya, jika betul kamu orang-orang yang beriman.
Dan Allah menjelaskan kepada kamu ayat-ayat keterangan (hukum-hukumNya); kerana Allah Maha Mengetahui, lagi Maha Bijaksana.
Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang suka terhebah tuduhan-tuduhan yang buruk dalam kalangan orang-orang yang beriman, mereka akan beroleh azab siksa yang tidak terperi sakitnya di dunia dan di akhirat; dan (ingatlah) Allah mengetahui (segala perkara) sedang kamu tidak mengetahui (yang demikian)."
Sesungguhnya sejarah gerakan Athisme dan Komunisme di dunia Arab secara khusus melatih perkaderan di peringkat akar umbi untuk menonjolkan akhlak yang songsang yang dilemparkan terhadap pimpinan ahli agama Islam yang komited dengannya, ia adalah cara untuk memburukkan nama baik dan imej mereka kepada umum (kerana mahu meraih kepentingan tertentu) agar umum tidak lagi percaya dan memberi sokongan kepada ahli-ahli agama, inilah yang pernah dilakukan oleh pengikut Komunis di Iraq satu ketika dahulu di kalangan parti Ba?ath (Kebangsaan Arab).
Justeru, kita amat rasa sedih apa yang sedang berlaku di Malaysia sekarang ini di mana para pemimpin kerajaan bertindak serupa dengan apa yang pernah berlaku di Iraq, mereka lakukan itu adalah semata-mata untuk kepentingan politik kotor mereka dan menyekat kemaraan pengaruh lawan dengan apa sahaja cara sekali pun walaupun melibatkan harga diri seseorang.
Mereka ini bukanlah pemimpin kerajaan yang baik yang boleh menjaga kebaikan dan kemaslahatan negara, tetapi untuk diri mereka semata-mata, tapi bagaimanapun tindakan mereka itu akan dibalas, kalau pun tidak pada diri mereka, mungkin isteri serta anak-anak mereka.
Apa yang umum hingga di peringkat global mengetahui, bahawa Saudara Anwar Ibrahim sejak masa mudanya dilantik sebagai ketua gerakan belia di Malaysia (ABIM), pernah mengurus kira-kira 25 buah sekolah beraliran agama khusus buat remaja lelaki dan perempuan (sekolah alternatif) di seluruh tanahair, tidak kedengaran pada usia remajanya atau ketika memimpin gerakan belia, sesuatu yang menjatuhkan harga diri atau maruahnya dengan tindakan yang menyalahi ajaran agama Islam. Jika pada usia begitu beliau disenangi, dipercayai dan dihormati sebagai seorang pemimpin yang baik, bagaiman mungkin pada usia yang mencecah 60 akan terlibat dengan perlakuan kaum Lut?.
Beliau sekarang ini terdedah kepada pelbagai ancaman, konspirasi, provokasi, bagi mengekalkan amalan politik kotor sekali gus mengajak manusia seluruhnya untuk menentang Allah SWT.
Isu akuan bersumpah sebenarnya tidak dibahaskan panjang lebar oleh kalangan fuqaha? melainkan pada keadaan bila wujudnya pembunuhan antara dua kampung hingga tidak dapat dikenal pasti siapa pembunuh sebenar, maka menurut sebahagian mereka: Akuan bersumpah hendaklah dilakukan oleh 50 orang ahli setiap kampung bagi membersihkan diri daripada sebarang tuduhan, tetapi ia bukan dalam isu yang sedang dibincangkan iaitu ?Qazaf?.
Ini kerana apa yang sedang disaksikan ialah isu antara seorang penuduh fasiq lagi zalim tidak diterima kesaksiaannya dan seorang yang teraniaya dan bersih daripada tuduhan tetapi tidak diberi haknya untuk membebaskan diri daripadanya.
Isu ini serupa apa yang pernah berlaku kepada pemimpin gerakan Islam Iraq al-marhum Syeikh Muhammad Mahmud as-Sowaf dan Syeikh Abdul Aziz al-Badri yang dilemparkan oleh pengikut Komunis dengan pelbagai dakwaan dan tuduhan hingga kedua-dua mereka tidaK dapat membela diri untuk membersihkan nama baik dan maruah.
Isu Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang pernah cemerlang dalam kepimpinannya ketika menerajui Kementerian Belia dan Sukan dan Ketua Pergerakan Pemuda Umno beberapa tahun, tidak kedengaran suara-suara sumbang daripada golongan remaja, belia bersamanya dahulu menyebut tentang perlakuan sumbang beliau, tetapi bagaimana sejak akhir-akhir ini terdapat kecenderungan pihak tertentu dengan rasa tidak malu dan takut kepada Allah melemparkan tuduhan negatif itu.
Saya menyeru pihak terbabit secara jujur, bertakwalah kamu kepada Allah, takutkan akan Dia Yang Maha Bertindak Balas ke atas hamba-hambaNya di akhirat, ingatlah ketegasan Allah dalam al-Quran : Sesungguhnnya hari tersebut (kiamat) tidak akan memberi manfaat harta dan anak-pinak, melainkan mereka yang datang menemui Allah dengan hati yang selamat (dari sebarang penyakit hati yang merbahaya).
Secara peribadi selaku seorang muslim, harapan dan seruan saya kepada Kerajaan Malaysia, agar bertakwa kepada Allah dalam mengurus negara dan rakyat, khususnya orang Melayu/Islam, berakhlaklah dengan nilai akhlak Islam yang murni, dengan tidak melebihkan politik daripada akhlak, jangan bertindak sesuatu yang boleh melucutkan harga diri seseorang atau rakyat hilang keyakinan para pemimpin yang memerintah negara sekarang ini, kerana setiap sesuatu yang zalim itu adalah jalan kegelapan, yang rosak itu akan membawa kepada neraka yang membakar.
Kita bermohon kepada Allah agar Dia memelihara negara dan rakyat di bawah naungan-Nya. - mr_
The Sydney Morning Herald commentary
The Sydney Morning Herald commentary
Wednesday, 09 July 2008
Yet if there is one man steeled to challenge the political stranglehold of the coalition that has ruled Malaysia for half a century, it is Mr Anwar.
MySinchew
There is a political storm building in Malaysia that Australia cannot afford to ignore. The decision by the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, to seek to avoid the worst of the turbulence when he flies into Kuala Lumpur on Thursday (10 July) is short sighted, according to The Sydney Morning Herald.
Mr Rudd will meet the beleaguered Malaysian Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi, who suffered an extraordinary swing against his ruling party in March despite the considerable advantages of incumbency.
But Mr Rudd will not meet the man at the centre of the political drama, the de facto opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim.
Yet if there is one man steeled to challenge the political stranglehold of the coalition that has ruled Malaysia for half a century, it is Mr Anwar. In the late 1990s, the one-time Muslim student leader rose to the position of deputy to the then prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, who presided over a Malaysian democracy of form, not substance. Harsh internal security laws, a vast police special branch, media controls and a tamed judiciary helped keep the Barisan Nasional in power, according to the paper.
Mr Anwar's stellar political rise was cut short in 1998 by sensational sodomy and corruption charges, protecting Dr Mahathir from a potential challenge from within. A six-year jail term and a serious beating at the hands of police turned Mr Anwar into a popular symbol of disaffection across Malaysian society. When Mr Anwar's sodomy conviction was overturned in 2004 after Dr Mahathir's retirement, there were hopes for a more open political system under Mr Abdullah.
But, the report pointed out, it is deja vu in Kuala Lumpur. Just months after a court ban expired, clearing the way for Mr Anwar to stand for election again, another sodomy allegation has been trotted out. Given the timing and the politicization of the Malaysian judiciary and police, it must be regarded with deep suspicion.
Mr Rudd's office says protocol rules out a meeting with Mr Anwar. However, it is not unusual for Australian prime ministers to meet significant political figures while overseas; Mr Rudd met Hillary Clinton and John McCain while in the US this year. George Bush and Hu Jintao met him when in Sydney before last year's elections.
How Malaysia's deepening political tensions play out, and at what cost to democracy and stability, is of great regional significance. Mr Anwar is a former deputy prime minister and now leads a coalition of opposition parties that has already delivered an unexpected body blow to the Government. He is a man Australia needs to understand, The Sydney Morning Herald points out.
Wednesday, 09 July 2008
Yet if there is one man steeled to challenge the political stranglehold of the coalition that has ruled Malaysia for half a century, it is Mr Anwar.
MySinchew
There is a political storm building in Malaysia that Australia cannot afford to ignore. The decision by the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, to seek to avoid the worst of the turbulence when he flies into Kuala Lumpur on Thursday (10 July) is short sighted, according to The Sydney Morning Herald.
Mr Rudd will meet the beleaguered Malaysian Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi, who suffered an extraordinary swing against his ruling party in March despite the considerable advantages of incumbency.
But Mr Rudd will not meet the man at the centre of the political drama, the de facto opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim.
Yet if there is one man steeled to challenge the political stranglehold of the coalition that has ruled Malaysia for half a century, it is Mr Anwar. In the late 1990s, the one-time Muslim student leader rose to the position of deputy to the then prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, who presided over a Malaysian democracy of form, not substance. Harsh internal security laws, a vast police special branch, media controls and a tamed judiciary helped keep the Barisan Nasional in power, according to the paper.
Mr Anwar's stellar political rise was cut short in 1998 by sensational sodomy and corruption charges, protecting Dr Mahathir from a potential challenge from within. A six-year jail term and a serious beating at the hands of police turned Mr Anwar into a popular symbol of disaffection across Malaysian society. When Mr Anwar's sodomy conviction was overturned in 2004 after Dr Mahathir's retirement, there were hopes for a more open political system under Mr Abdullah.
But, the report pointed out, it is deja vu in Kuala Lumpur. Just months after a court ban expired, clearing the way for Mr Anwar to stand for election again, another sodomy allegation has been trotted out. Given the timing and the politicization of the Malaysian judiciary and police, it must be regarded with deep suspicion.
Mr Rudd's office says protocol rules out a meeting with Mr Anwar. However, it is not unusual for Australian prime ministers to meet significant political figures while overseas; Mr Rudd met Hillary Clinton and John McCain while in the US this year. George Bush and Hu Jintao met him when in Sydney before last year's elections.
How Malaysia's deepening political tensions play out, and at what cost to democracy and stability, is of great regional significance. Mr Anwar is a former deputy prime minister and now leads a coalition of opposition parties that has already delivered an unexpected body blow to the Government. He is a man Australia needs to understand, The Sydney Morning Herald points out.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Laporan Polis DSAI Terhadap Musa Hassan & Gani Patail
Laporan Polis DSAI Terhadap Musa Hassan & Gani Patail - BM & English
Saya, Anwar bin Ibrahim, sesungguhnya di sini membuat laporan polis berikut berdasarkan maklumat yang telah saya perolehi baru-baru ini.
1. Laporan ini adalah berkaitan dengan siasatan terdahap serangan fizikal yang dilakukan ke atas saya oleh bekas Ketua Polis Negara, Tan Sri Rahim Noor (“Rahim Noor”) pada 20hb September 1998. Saya percaya Tan Sri Rahim Noor, selepas didakwa, telah mengaku bersalah atas tuduhan serangan fizikal tersebut. Saya telah membuat laporan polis berkenaan serangan fizikal tersebut pada 27.9.98.
2. Berkaitan dengan penyiasatan terhadap serangan fizikal tersebut, saya percaya bahawa Pegawai Penyiasat, ACP Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (sekarang Datuk Mat Zain) telah melakukan satu penyiasatan yang mendalam dan menyeluruh dan menyediakan satu kertas siasatan (“IP”) yang telah kemudiannya pada Oktober 1998, menyerahkannya kepada bekas Peguam Negara, Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah (“Tan Sri Mokhtar”) serta pasukannya yang antaranya termasuklah Peguam Negara sekarang Tan Sri Gani Patail untuk tindakan lanjut.
3. Kertas siasatan tersebut telah menyimpulkan bahawa Tan Sri Rahim Noor adalah pelaku serangan fizikal tersebut ke atas saya. Kertas tersebut telah membuat kesimpulan setelah siasatan menyeluruh dilakukan, dengan mengambilkira laporan perubatan daripada pakar forensik daripada Hospital Kuala Lumpur seperti Dr. Ab. Halim Haji Mansar dan Dr. Zahari bin Noor dan kenyataan dari sekurang-kurangnya 60 orang saksi. Laporan perubatan tersebut menyimpulkan bahawa kesan kecederaan yang dilakukan ke atas saya adalah konsisten dengan satu serangan fizikal.
4. Walaupun kandungan kertas siasatan dan lapuran perubatan yang tersedia, Tan Sri Mokhtar dengan bantuan Peguam Negara hari ini dan, Tan Sri Gani Patail telah mendapatkan khidmat seorang pegawai perubatan bernama Dr. Abdul Rahman bin Yusof (Dr. Abdul Rahman).
5. Dr. Abdul Rahman dalam satu laporan tidak bertarikh menyediakan laporan kedua yang menyentuh “lakonan semula tempat kejadian” pada 14 Disember 1998. Saya percaya bahawa “lakonan semula tempat kejadian” tersebut tidak pernah berlaku.
6. Adalah satu fakta yang tidak disangkalkan bahawa laporan perubatan Dr Abdul Rahman berhubung serangan yang dilakukan terhadap saya disediakan tanpa langsung melakukan pemeriksaan fizikal ke atas saya terlebih dahulu.
7. Walaupun sudah ada kertas siasatan dan laporan kesihatan yang lengkap, Tan Sri Mokhtar dalam kenyataan akhbarnya bertarikh 5 Januari 1999, menerima pandangan yang diberikan oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman mengenai apa yang dikatakan sebagai “perkara-perkara tidak konsisten” dalam laporan perubatan doktor-doktor lain yang telah menjalankan pemeriksaan fizikal ke atas saya.
8. Kenyataan akhbar Tan Sri Mokhtar juga menyatakan siasatan yang telah dijalankan tidak dapat mengenalpasti individu atau mereka yang menyebabkan kecederaan ke atas saya. Ini sesungguhnya bercanggah dengan laporan siasatan yang selesai dilakukan menjelang Oktober 1998 yang menyimpulkan bahawa Rahim Noor menyerang saya. Tan Sri Mokhtar dan pasukannya dengan itu telah secara sengaja mengelirukan masyarakat. Apabila siasatan polis menjadi tidak lengkap, orang ramai menjadi resah dan menuntut ditubuhkan satu Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja. Tan Sri Mokhtar juga telah membuat kenyataan palsu bahawa kertas siasatan telah diserahkan kepada beliau hanya pada 19.11.98. Saya percaya Tan Sri Gani Patail ada makluman penuh tentang kenyataan palsu yang terkandung dalam kenyataan akhbar tersebut.
9. Saya juga percaya Tan Sri Musa Hassan dan Tan Sri Gani Patail telah hadir di Bukit Aman pada 20 September 1998 dan mengetahui mengenai serangan Tan Sri Rahim Noor terhadap saya. Tan Sri Musa dan Tan Sri Gani selanjutnya menyembunyikan fakta mengenai serangan terhadap saya dari pengetahuan umum sehinggalah mata saya yang lebam dan kecederaan yang saya alami didedahkan di mahkamah.
10. Saya percaya kedua-dua Tan Sri Musa dan Tan Sri Gani Patail secara aktif terlibat dalam menyediakan lapuran kedua tidak bertarikh oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman yang telah membuat kesimpulan palsu dan pelik seperti “the pattern and nature of the injuries are not consistent with a direct blow” [“bentuk dan ciri kecederaan adalah tidak konsisten dengan pukulan secara langsung”], “accidental nature of the injuries could not be ruled out” [“kemungkinan kecederaan ini disebabkan oleh kemalangan tidak boleh ditolak”] dan “self-inflicted nature of the injury should be considered” [kemungkinan kecederaan disebabkan perbuatan sendiri harus diberikan pertimbangan”]. Mereka mengarahkan Dr. Abdul Rahman untuk menyediakan lapuran kedua ini dan bertindak di bawah pengarahan dan/atau bersama Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah.
11. Semua fakta-fakta ini menunjukkan Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Tan Sri Gani Patail dan SAC II Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (individu, yang menurut Dr. Abdul Rahman dalam lapurannya, telah mengiringi beliau ke sel di Bukit Aman di mana saya ditahan dan terlibat dalam apa yang didakwa ‘lakonan semula tempat kejadian’) telah berpakat dengan Dr. Abdul Rahman untuk menyediakan lapuran kedua ini. Ini telah dilakukan agar lapuran polis saya bertarikh 27.9.98 mengenai serangan tersebut akan dikira sebagai lapuran polis palsu dan saya boleh didakwa, atau sekurang-kurangnya merosakkan kredibiliti saya bagi memberi kesan buruk terhadap pembelaan saya dalam kes-kes jenayah yang mana saya telah didakwa melakukan ‘korupsi’ dan liwat bagi membolehkan saya didapati bersalah.
12. Saya ingin menyatakan bahawa Tan Sri Gani Patail adalah pegawai pendakwa kanan yang membantu Tan Sri Mokhtar dalam membuat pendakwaan ke atas saya. Tan Sri Musa Hassan adalah Pegawai Penyiasat dalam pendakwaan terhadap saya. Saya juga percaya, satu tindakan yang tidak pernah dibuat sebelum ini telah diambil apabila satu bilik operasi khusus telah disediakan di Bukit Aman untuk menguruskan pendakwaan saya dan di mana mereka akan berjumpa secara kerap.
13. Ini bukanlah kali pertama dakwaan mengenai pemalsuan bukti dibuat berkaitan Tan Sri Gani Patail. Saya dimaklumkan bahawa dalam keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan Zainur bin Zakaria v Public Prosecutor [2001] 3 MLJ, Steve Shim, Hakim Besar, dalam penghakiman beliau menyatakan bahawa “… was he not justified, on a prima facie basis, in complaining that Tan Sri Gani Patail’s conduct at the meeting on 2.10.1998 was an attempt to get Nalla to fabricate evidence in order to perfect charges against him for other alleged sexual offences?”
Perkataan “he” dan “him” dalam ayat di atas merujuk kepada diri saya.
14. Berkenaan perkara di atas, saya merujuk kepada dokumen berkenaan bagi membantu siasatan polis:
1. Kenyataan akhbar Tan Sri Mokhtar yang dibuat pada 5.1.99.
2. Nota prosiding dalam lapuran Suruhanjaya DiRaja berkaitan keterangan Dr Abdul Rahman
3. Laporan Kesihatan kedua yang dibuat oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman yang terkandung dalam lapuran Suruhanjaya.
15. Saya memohon diadakan satu siasatan baru terhadap pemalsuan bukti yang mana saya telah dinasihati sebagai satu kesalahan di bawah seksyen 192 Kanun Keseksaan yang boleh membawa hukuman penjara 7 tahun. Saya memohon agar setiap individu yang terlibat dalam menyediakan laporan kedua oleh Dr Abdul Rahman ini iaitu Tan Sri Gani Patail, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Dr. Rahman dan Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim disiasat secara terperinci agar kebenaran diperolehi dan sebarang salah laku dihukum.
ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM
1 Julai 2008
*
POLICE REPORT LODGED BY DATO’ SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM
1ST July, 2008
I, Anwar bin Ibrahim, hereby make the following police report based on information that I have recently received.
1. This report is in relation to the investigation into the assault on me by the former IGP Tan Sri Rahim Noor on 20 September 1998. I believe Tan Sri Rahim Noor, after being prosecuted, pleaded guilty to the assault. I had lodged a police report in respect of the assault on 27.9.98.
2. In relation to the investigation into the assault, I believe that the Investigating Officer ACP Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (now Datuk Mat Zain) had conducted a thorough investigation and prepared an investigation paper (“IP”) which was presented by October 1998 to the former Attorney General, Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah and his team which included the current Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail for further action.
3. The said investigation paper concluded that Tan Sri Rahim Noor was the perpetrator of the assault on me. The said paper reached a conclusion after a thorough investigation which included medical reports by Hospital KL forensic specialists such as Dr. Ab. Halim Haji Mansar and Dr.Zahari bin Noor and statement from at least 60 witnesses. The medical reports concluded that the injury inflicted on me was consistent with an assault.
4. Despite the contents of the Investigation paper and the medical reports already available, Tan Sri Mokhtar with the assistance of the current Attorney General, Tan Sri Gani Patail then obtained the services of another doctor whom I was informed to be one Dr. Abdul Rahman Yusof.
5. Doctor Rahman in an undated and second report speaks of a “reconstruction of the scene” on 14 December 1998. I believe that this so-called reconstruction of the scene never happened.
6. It is an undisputable fact that Dr. Rahman’s reports in relation to the assault on me were done without actually even examining me at any time.
7. However, despite the IP and the already existing medical reports, Tan Sri Mokhtar in his press statement of 5 January 1999 appears to accept the views of Dr. Rahman on the so-called “inconsistencies” in the other medical reports by the doctors who actually physically examined me.
8. Tan Sri Mokhtar’s press statement also states that the investigation which had been carried out did not identify the person or persons responsible for my injuries. This is inconsistent with the IP which had already concluded by October 1998 that it was Rahim Noor who assaulted me. Tan Sri Mokhtar and his team therefore had willfully misled the public. As the police investigation done by Mat Zain had apparently not led to any conclusion, there was a public outcry and demand for a Royal Commission which was then set up. Tan Sri Mokhtar also made a false statement that the IP was submitted to him on 19.11.98. I believe that Tan Sri Gani Patail had full knowledge of the false contents of this press statement.
9. I believe Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Tan Sri Gani Patail were present in Bukit Aman on 20 September 1998 and knew about the assault by Tan Sri Rahim Noor on me. Tan Sri Musa and Tan Sri Gani further concealed the fact of the assault on me from the public until my black eye and injuries were revealed in court.
10. I believe both Tan Sri Musa and Tan Sri Gani Patail were actively involved in the procuring of the second undated report by Dr. Rahman which makes false and incredible conclusions such as “the pattern and nature of the injuries are not consistent with a direct blow”, “accidental nature of the injuries could not be ruled out” and “self-inflicted nature of the injury should be considered”. They gave the instructions to Dr. Rahman to proceed to write this second report and were acting under the direction and/or jointly with Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah.
11. These facts show that Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Tan Sri Gani Patail and SAC II Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (who, according to Dr. Rahman’s second report, accompanied him to the cell in Bukit Aman where I was detained and participated in the so-called reconstruction of the scene) conspired with Dr. Rahman to procure the production of this second report. This was done so that my police report of 27.9.98 in respect of the assault would be regarded as a false police report for which I could be charged, or at the very least, to damage my credibility, so as to affect my defence in the other criminal cases where I was charged for so-called “corruption” and sodomy to facilitate a conviction.
12. I wish to point out that Tan Sri Gani Patail was the senior prosecutor assisting Tan Sri Mokhtar in the prosecution against me. Tan Sri Musa Hassan was the Investigating Officer for my prosecution. I also believe, that in an unprecedented manner, an operation room specially for my prosecution was set up at Bukit Aman’s compound where all these individuals would meet regularly.
13. This is not the first time that allegations of fabricating evidence had surfaced in connection with Tan Sri Gani Patail. I am informed that in the Federal Court decision Zainur bin Zakaria v Public Prosecutor [2001] 3 MLJ, Steve Shim CJ in delivering his judgment pointed out that “… was he not justified, on a prima facie basis, in complaining that Tan Sri Gani Patail’s conduct at the meeting on 2.10.1998 was an attempt to get Nalla to fabricate evidence in order to perfect charges against him for other alleged sexual offences?” The references to “he” and “him” in that sentence are references to myself.
14. In relation to the above, I refer to the following documents which will be of assistance to the police:
1. The press statement by Tan Sri Mokhtar issued on 5.1.99.
2. The notes of proceedings in the report of the Royal Commission of the evidence of Dr. Rahman
3. The second undated report produced by Dr. Rahman exhibited in the Royal Commission report.
15. I call for a fresh investigation into the fabrication of evidence in this case which I am advised is an offence contrary to section 192 of the Penal Code punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. I ask that all the persons who are implicated in the procuring of this second report by Dr. Rahman i.e. Tan Sri Gani Patail, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Dr. Rahman and Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim be investigated thoroughly so that the truth is known and the offending individuals punished.
.
ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM
1st July 2008
Saya, Anwar bin Ibrahim, sesungguhnya di sini membuat laporan polis berikut berdasarkan maklumat yang telah saya perolehi baru-baru ini.
1. Laporan ini adalah berkaitan dengan siasatan terdahap serangan fizikal yang dilakukan ke atas saya oleh bekas Ketua Polis Negara, Tan Sri Rahim Noor (“Rahim Noor”) pada 20hb September 1998. Saya percaya Tan Sri Rahim Noor, selepas didakwa, telah mengaku bersalah atas tuduhan serangan fizikal tersebut. Saya telah membuat laporan polis berkenaan serangan fizikal tersebut pada 27.9.98.
2. Berkaitan dengan penyiasatan terhadap serangan fizikal tersebut, saya percaya bahawa Pegawai Penyiasat, ACP Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (sekarang Datuk Mat Zain) telah melakukan satu penyiasatan yang mendalam dan menyeluruh dan menyediakan satu kertas siasatan (“IP”) yang telah kemudiannya pada Oktober 1998, menyerahkannya kepada bekas Peguam Negara, Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah (“Tan Sri Mokhtar”) serta pasukannya yang antaranya termasuklah Peguam Negara sekarang Tan Sri Gani Patail untuk tindakan lanjut.
3. Kertas siasatan tersebut telah menyimpulkan bahawa Tan Sri Rahim Noor adalah pelaku serangan fizikal tersebut ke atas saya. Kertas tersebut telah membuat kesimpulan setelah siasatan menyeluruh dilakukan, dengan mengambilkira laporan perubatan daripada pakar forensik daripada Hospital Kuala Lumpur seperti Dr. Ab. Halim Haji Mansar dan Dr. Zahari bin Noor dan kenyataan dari sekurang-kurangnya 60 orang saksi. Laporan perubatan tersebut menyimpulkan bahawa kesan kecederaan yang dilakukan ke atas saya adalah konsisten dengan satu serangan fizikal.
4. Walaupun kandungan kertas siasatan dan lapuran perubatan yang tersedia, Tan Sri Mokhtar dengan bantuan Peguam Negara hari ini dan, Tan Sri Gani Patail telah mendapatkan khidmat seorang pegawai perubatan bernama Dr. Abdul Rahman bin Yusof (Dr. Abdul Rahman).
5. Dr. Abdul Rahman dalam satu laporan tidak bertarikh menyediakan laporan kedua yang menyentuh “lakonan semula tempat kejadian” pada 14 Disember 1998. Saya percaya bahawa “lakonan semula tempat kejadian” tersebut tidak pernah berlaku.
6. Adalah satu fakta yang tidak disangkalkan bahawa laporan perubatan Dr Abdul Rahman berhubung serangan yang dilakukan terhadap saya disediakan tanpa langsung melakukan pemeriksaan fizikal ke atas saya terlebih dahulu.
7. Walaupun sudah ada kertas siasatan dan laporan kesihatan yang lengkap, Tan Sri Mokhtar dalam kenyataan akhbarnya bertarikh 5 Januari 1999, menerima pandangan yang diberikan oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman mengenai apa yang dikatakan sebagai “perkara-perkara tidak konsisten” dalam laporan perubatan doktor-doktor lain yang telah menjalankan pemeriksaan fizikal ke atas saya.
8. Kenyataan akhbar Tan Sri Mokhtar juga menyatakan siasatan yang telah dijalankan tidak dapat mengenalpasti individu atau mereka yang menyebabkan kecederaan ke atas saya. Ini sesungguhnya bercanggah dengan laporan siasatan yang selesai dilakukan menjelang Oktober 1998 yang menyimpulkan bahawa Rahim Noor menyerang saya. Tan Sri Mokhtar dan pasukannya dengan itu telah secara sengaja mengelirukan masyarakat. Apabila siasatan polis menjadi tidak lengkap, orang ramai menjadi resah dan menuntut ditubuhkan satu Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja. Tan Sri Mokhtar juga telah membuat kenyataan palsu bahawa kertas siasatan telah diserahkan kepada beliau hanya pada 19.11.98. Saya percaya Tan Sri Gani Patail ada makluman penuh tentang kenyataan palsu yang terkandung dalam kenyataan akhbar tersebut.
9. Saya juga percaya Tan Sri Musa Hassan dan Tan Sri Gani Patail telah hadir di Bukit Aman pada 20 September 1998 dan mengetahui mengenai serangan Tan Sri Rahim Noor terhadap saya. Tan Sri Musa dan Tan Sri Gani selanjutnya menyembunyikan fakta mengenai serangan terhadap saya dari pengetahuan umum sehinggalah mata saya yang lebam dan kecederaan yang saya alami didedahkan di mahkamah.
10. Saya percaya kedua-dua Tan Sri Musa dan Tan Sri Gani Patail secara aktif terlibat dalam menyediakan lapuran kedua tidak bertarikh oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman yang telah membuat kesimpulan palsu dan pelik seperti “the pattern and nature of the injuries are not consistent with a direct blow” [“bentuk dan ciri kecederaan adalah tidak konsisten dengan pukulan secara langsung”], “accidental nature of the injuries could not be ruled out” [“kemungkinan kecederaan ini disebabkan oleh kemalangan tidak boleh ditolak”] dan “self-inflicted nature of the injury should be considered” [kemungkinan kecederaan disebabkan perbuatan sendiri harus diberikan pertimbangan”]. Mereka mengarahkan Dr. Abdul Rahman untuk menyediakan lapuran kedua ini dan bertindak di bawah pengarahan dan/atau bersama Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah.
11. Semua fakta-fakta ini menunjukkan Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Tan Sri Gani Patail dan SAC II Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (individu, yang menurut Dr. Abdul Rahman dalam lapurannya, telah mengiringi beliau ke sel di Bukit Aman di mana saya ditahan dan terlibat dalam apa yang didakwa ‘lakonan semula tempat kejadian’) telah berpakat dengan Dr. Abdul Rahman untuk menyediakan lapuran kedua ini. Ini telah dilakukan agar lapuran polis saya bertarikh 27.9.98 mengenai serangan tersebut akan dikira sebagai lapuran polis palsu dan saya boleh didakwa, atau sekurang-kurangnya merosakkan kredibiliti saya bagi memberi kesan buruk terhadap pembelaan saya dalam kes-kes jenayah yang mana saya telah didakwa melakukan ‘korupsi’ dan liwat bagi membolehkan saya didapati bersalah.
12. Saya ingin menyatakan bahawa Tan Sri Gani Patail adalah pegawai pendakwa kanan yang membantu Tan Sri Mokhtar dalam membuat pendakwaan ke atas saya. Tan Sri Musa Hassan adalah Pegawai Penyiasat dalam pendakwaan terhadap saya. Saya juga percaya, satu tindakan yang tidak pernah dibuat sebelum ini telah diambil apabila satu bilik operasi khusus telah disediakan di Bukit Aman untuk menguruskan pendakwaan saya dan di mana mereka akan berjumpa secara kerap.
13. Ini bukanlah kali pertama dakwaan mengenai pemalsuan bukti dibuat berkaitan Tan Sri Gani Patail. Saya dimaklumkan bahawa dalam keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan Zainur bin Zakaria v Public Prosecutor [2001] 3 MLJ, Steve Shim, Hakim Besar, dalam penghakiman beliau menyatakan bahawa “… was he not justified, on a prima facie basis, in complaining that Tan Sri Gani Patail’s conduct at the meeting on 2.10.1998 was an attempt to get Nalla to fabricate evidence in order to perfect charges against him for other alleged sexual offences?”
Perkataan “he” dan “him” dalam ayat di atas merujuk kepada diri saya.
14. Berkenaan perkara di atas, saya merujuk kepada dokumen berkenaan bagi membantu siasatan polis:
1. Kenyataan akhbar Tan Sri Mokhtar yang dibuat pada 5.1.99.
2. Nota prosiding dalam lapuran Suruhanjaya DiRaja berkaitan keterangan Dr Abdul Rahman
3. Laporan Kesihatan kedua yang dibuat oleh Dr. Abdul Rahman yang terkandung dalam lapuran Suruhanjaya.
15. Saya memohon diadakan satu siasatan baru terhadap pemalsuan bukti yang mana saya telah dinasihati sebagai satu kesalahan di bawah seksyen 192 Kanun Keseksaan yang boleh membawa hukuman penjara 7 tahun. Saya memohon agar setiap individu yang terlibat dalam menyediakan laporan kedua oleh Dr Abdul Rahman ini iaitu Tan Sri Gani Patail, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Dr. Rahman dan Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim disiasat secara terperinci agar kebenaran diperolehi dan sebarang salah laku dihukum.
ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM
1 Julai 2008
*
POLICE REPORT LODGED BY DATO’ SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM
1ST July, 2008
I, Anwar bin Ibrahim, hereby make the following police report based on information that I have recently received.
1. This report is in relation to the investigation into the assault on me by the former IGP Tan Sri Rahim Noor on 20 September 1998. I believe Tan Sri Rahim Noor, after being prosecuted, pleaded guilty to the assault. I had lodged a police report in respect of the assault on 27.9.98.
2. In relation to the investigation into the assault, I believe that the Investigating Officer ACP Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (now Datuk Mat Zain) had conducted a thorough investigation and prepared an investigation paper (“IP”) which was presented by October 1998 to the former Attorney General, Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah and his team which included the current Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail for further action.
3. The said investigation paper concluded that Tan Sri Rahim Noor was the perpetrator of the assault on me. The said paper reached a conclusion after a thorough investigation which included medical reports by Hospital KL forensic specialists such as Dr. Ab. Halim Haji Mansar and Dr.Zahari bin Noor and statement from at least 60 witnesses. The medical reports concluded that the injury inflicted on me was consistent with an assault.
4. Despite the contents of the Investigation paper and the medical reports already available, Tan Sri Mokhtar with the assistance of the current Attorney General, Tan Sri Gani Patail then obtained the services of another doctor whom I was informed to be one Dr. Abdul Rahman Yusof.
5. Doctor Rahman in an undated and second report speaks of a “reconstruction of the scene” on 14 December 1998. I believe that this so-called reconstruction of the scene never happened.
6. It is an undisputable fact that Dr. Rahman’s reports in relation to the assault on me were done without actually even examining me at any time.
7. However, despite the IP and the already existing medical reports, Tan Sri Mokhtar in his press statement of 5 January 1999 appears to accept the views of Dr. Rahman on the so-called “inconsistencies” in the other medical reports by the doctors who actually physically examined me.
8. Tan Sri Mokhtar’s press statement also states that the investigation which had been carried out did not identify the person or persons responsible for my injuries. This is inconsistent with the IP which had already concluded by October 1998 that it was Rahim Noor who assaulted me. Tan Sri Mokhtar and his team therefore had willfully misled the public. As the police investigation done by Mat Zain had apparently not led to any conclusion, there was a public outcry and demand for a Royal Commission which was then set up. Tan Sri Mokhtar also made a false statement that the IP was submitted to him on 19.11.98. I believe that Tan Sri Gani Patail had full knowledge of the false contents of this press statement.
9. I believe Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Tan Sri Gani Patail were present in Bukit Aman on 20 September 1998 and knew about the assault by Tan Sri Rahim Noor on me. Tan Sri Musa and Tan Sri Gani further concealed the fact of the assault on me from the public until my black eye and injuries were revealed in court.
10. I believe both Tan Sri Musa and Tan Sri Gani Patail were actively involved in the procuring of the second undated report by Dr. Rahman which makes false and incredible conclusions such as “the pattern and nature of the injuries are not consistent with a direct blow”, “accidental nature of the injuries could not be ruled out” and “self-inflicted nature of the injury should be considered”. They gave the instructions to Dr. Rahman to proceed to write this second report and were acting under the direction and/or jointly with Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah.
11. These facts show that Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Tan Sri Gani Patail and SAC II Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (who, according to Dr. Rahman’s second report, accompanied him to the cell in Bukit Aman where I was detained and participated in the so-called reconstruction of the scene) conspired with Dr. Rahman to procure the production of this second report. This was done so that my police report of 27.9.98 in respect of the assault would be regarded as a false police report for which I could be charged, or at the very least, to damage my credibility, so as to affect my defence in the other criminal cases where I was charged for so-called “corruption” and sodomy to facilitate a conviction.
12. I wish to point out that Tan Sri Gani Patail was the senior prosecutor assisting Tan Sri Mokhtar in the prosecution against me. Tan Sri Musa Hassan was the Investigating Officer for my prosecution. I also believe, that in an unprecedented manner, an operation room specially for my prosecution was set up at Bukit Aman’s compound where all these individuals would meet regularly.
13. This is not the first time that allegations of fabricating evidence had surfaced in connection with Tan Sri Gani Patail. I am informed that in the Federal Court decision Zainur bin Zakaria v Public Prosecutor [2001] 3 MLJ, Steve Shim CJ in delivering his judgment pointed out that “… was he not justified, on a prima facie basis, in complaining that Tan Sri Gani Patail’s conduct at the meeting on 2.10.1998 was an attempt to get Nalla to fabricate evidence in order to perfect charges against him for other alleged sexual offences?” The references to “he” and “him” in that sentence are references to myself.
14. In relation to the above, I refer to the following documents which will be of assistance to the police:
1. The press statement by Tan Sri Mokhtar issued on 5.1.99.
2. The notes of proceedings in the report of the Royal Commission of the evidence of Dr. Rahman
3. The second undated report produced by Dr. Rahman exhibited in the Royal Commission report.
15. I call for a fresh investigation into the fabrication of evidence in this case which I am advised is an offence contrary to section 192 of the Penal Code punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. I ask that all the persons who are implicated in the procuring of this second report by Dr. Rahman i.e. Tan Sri Gani Patail, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Dr. Rahman and Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim be investigated thoroughly so that the truth is known and the offending individuals punished.
.
ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM
1st July 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
