Anwar Ibrahim |
- Something Rotten At The Duta Courts
- ‘Larangan Polis Tak Sah, Langgar Perlembagaan’
- Bar Council Says ‘Shocked’ With Sex Video Screening In Court
- Disgraceful Attack On Anwar Ibrahim By Police & A-G’s Chambers In Datuk T Case
| Something Rotten At The Duta Courts Posted: 25 Jun 2011 07:15 AM PDT From Malaysiakini Shakespeare wrote in the play ‘Hamlet’ that “something is rotten in the state of Denmark”. Court of Appeal judge NH Chan had also made similar remarks when he wrote the Ayer Molek Rubber Co Bhd vs Insas Bhd judgment in 1995, where he described the case he was presiding over as being about an injustice perpetrated by a court of law. Can yesterday’s conviction of the infamous ‘Datuk T’ trio be said a travesty of justice deserving the local version that goes “something is rotten in Duta courts” resulting in possibly another charge looming over Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim? Anwar had yesterday maintained the government’s conspiracy in the matter, asking how can one respect a government when its instruments are so blatantly used politically. Let’s back-track a bit before returning to the conviction. The video was screened on March 21 at the posh and historical Carcosa Seri Negara Hotel by the Datuk T for several invited editors and journalists in a room booked under the name of former Malacca chief minister Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik, who is also Risda chairperson. Rahim is part of the Datuk T trio that also comprised businessperson Shazryl Eskay Abdullah and former MP Shuib Lazim – all three later claimed responsibility for the event. The three protagonists had called on Anwar to resign. This led to Anwar issuing a statement on the same day, March 21, denying that he was the man in the video and lodged a police report the next day. As a result, the trio was called in and it was during this time Eskay said he had handed the only copy of the sex tape to the police. However, parts of the clip made their way online just before the Sarawak state elections, only to resurface last month, this time in full. It also made its way to the homes of village headmen and politicians via post. After a period of silence, Eskay took a religious oath at a Sentul mosque – complete with bullet-proof vest – to swear that Anwar was the man in the video. Subsequently the trio pleaded guilty to be fined a total of RM5,500. Discrepancy before yesterday When Eskay told reporters on Wednesday that he would be charged on Friday, several parliament reporters claimed that they spotted Rahim apparently meeting Prime Minister Najib Razak in the august House. While Najib denied the meeting took place, Anwar maintains it did indeed happen, suggesting that it would probably lead to the charge being reduced, thus adding muscle to his assertion of a political conspiracy. The trio – Eskay, Rahim and Shuib – were the main actors along with DPPs Kamaludin Md Said and Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria and respected lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah as well as two other defence lawyers. Another bombshell dropped before the Datuk T trio were charged was when Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia published a story yesterday quoting Eskay as saying he was ready for any outcome with the article aptly titled ‘Kami sedia apa saja hukuman’ (We are prepared to face any punishment). So Utusan had a scoop, probably because they knew the high possibility of all three preparing to plead guilty. The same report stated that the trio would be charged under Section 5 of the Film Censorship Act, for circulating, exhibiting, distributing and displaying an obscene film, which is punishable by a fine of not less than RM10,000 and not more than RM50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. Utusan however got that charge wrong when prosecution filed a lesser charge against Datuk T. Anwar pounced on this to back his political conspiracy accusation. Proceedings in court Before the arrival of the accused, reporters somehow knew in advance that the case would be heard at magistrate’s court three and rushed up there. Normally, a case would have to be registered first, only then will the courtroom be known. That is the normal procedure any lawyer will tell you to ensure that there is no fixing of judge or magistrate. It could not be determined if the case had been registered first when the counter opened at 8am and that Eskay and co were told to arrive at that time, but they instead presented themselves sometime around 9.15am in court. According to reporters covering the trial, two widescreen televisions were already placed in court as a possible prelude to the video being screened. Some lawyers who were not watching the case but were in the massive court complex were heard murmuring that the protests outside the court in support of Datuk T and the charging were merely a sideshow – a show which has entranced and held the whole nation captive as the three-and-a-half hour proceedings rolled on. Another point of oddity was when the charge was read out under section 292 of the Penal Code, all three had asked for a break to consult their counsel, as this was “a new charge”. When the case was recalled, they pleaded guilty and suprisingly, the facts of case had already been conveniently prepared. The normal proceedings in such cases in a magistrate’s court is that when a person pleads guilty, the prosecutors would seek more time – usually a few hours or in the afternoon and sometimes the next day to prepare the statement. However, in this case, after a 45-minute interval, the charge was read again and all three entered their plea with the statement of facts ready to be read out in court. The five-page fact sheet appeared to have been carefully crafted to implicate Anwar in the video as his name was mentioned at least five times right from the first paragraph. Then came the real jolt when Shafee and not the prosecution told the magistrate that according to case laws, many such cases had been thrown out on appeal because the obscene material had not been screened. He then applied for the 20-minute sex-clip to be shown in court. The prosecution and other defence counsel raised no objections. The tape then appeared on the two big screens, which had been been placed there earlier. Then Shafee began his lengthy submission in mitigation, representing the third defendant, Rahim. He stated that the revelation of video was made in the defence of the public good and his client’s role was merely booking the hotel room. The other two counsel then delivered their submissions. Merely coincidences or conspiracy Putting together all the incidents, what is a sane person to assume – that they were merely coincidences or a meticulously crafted consipiracy as claimed by Anwar? This despite the foreign expert findings that the person performing the sex act resembled the opposition leader. The tape was shot before the crucial Sarawak election and the other point is that Anwar, who is facing an ongoing sodomy trial at that time, had successful block the admission of three crucial evidence retrieved in the police lock-up – the toothbrush, the mineral water bottle and white towel. The other point not mentioned earlier is that Eskay himself was embroiled in a legal battle involving a RM20 million suit he filed against Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd and one of its directors, over the construction of the Johor Baru crooked bridge. The High Court ruled against him. It is strange that the sex tape investigations took three months as according to a retired senior police officer, in such cases the person caught would be charged within a week. The clip was also widely distributed after Eskay had handed what he claimed as the only copy to the police. Were hidden hands at work when what was reportedly a charge under the Film Censorship Act as was highlighted in Utusan was reduced to a lesser offence under the Penal Code? Is it a coincidence that big screen televisions were placed in court before the start of proceedings and the facts of case conveniently prepared. As the facts present themselves, the readers can decide whether something rotten really happened at the Duta Court yesterday. |
| ‘Larangan Polis Tak Sah, Langgar Perlembagaan’ Posted: 24 Jun 2011 10:39 PM PDT Dari Malaysiakini Pakar perlembagaan Abdul Aziz Bari berpendapat tindakan pihak polis malarang perhimpunan BERSIH pada 9 Julai depan bukan sahaya tidak sah, malah melanggar perlembagaan. “Mereka bertindak secara tidak sah apabila secara umum memaklumkan tidak akan mengeluarkan permit. “Sebagai pihak berkuasa awam, mereka hanya boleh membuat keputusan apabila permohonan dibuat,” kata pensyarah Universiti Islam Antarabangsa itu kepada Malaysiakini. Abdul Aziz (kanan) menjelaskan, bawah perlembagaan, polis perlu menimbangkan setiap permohonan permit dan tidak patut membuat sebarang pertimbangan tidak wajar. Beliau berhujah, polis membuat penghakiman awal berhubung perkara itu dan sekali gus menentang undang-undang. Paling teruk apabila ia bertentangan dengan hak yang dijamin dalam perlembagaan. Katanya, mengikut Perkara 10(1)(b) Perlembagaan Perskutuan, polis tiada sebarang hak melarang perhimpunan aman yang dijamin. “Hatta mahkamah juga tidak boleh melakukannya,” kata pensyarah undang-undang itu. |
| Bar Council Says ‘Shocked’ With Sex Video Screening In Court Posted: 24 Jun 2011 09:42 PM PDT The magistrate's court should not have screened the sex video allegedly featuring Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yesterday because the "Datuk T" trio had already pleaded guilty to the crime, says the Bar Council. Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee described that the court's decision in allowing the video to be shown as "shocking" and "extraordinary." He stressed that there was no reason to do since those accused of screening the video had readily admitted to the crime. "There is no need to because they have already pleaded guilty; I am surprised why the sex video was shown in court. "This is an extraordinary procedure, I am shocked as to why it happened… if a person has already pleaded guilty there is no need to (reveal the evidence)," Lim told The Malaysian Insider. The lawyer said the court's action was inconsistent with standard procedures in such cases, where evidence is only revealed during the course of a full trial and when the accused maintains his or her innocence. Former Malacca Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik, businessman Datuk Shazryl Eskay Abdullah and former Perkasa treasurer-general Datuk Shuib Lazim, all of whom make up the "Datuk T" trio, were fined yesterday for their involvement in the screening of the sex video at Carcosa Seri Negara Hotel here on March 21. Abdul Rahim was hit with a RM1,000 fine for abetting Shazryl and Shuib, who were fined RM3,000 and RM1,500 respectively. Elaborating further, Lim said the punishment meted out was relevant to the offence committed by the three. "I have no problem with the punishment, it is just the sex video screening which is an issue," he added. |
| Disgraceful Attack On Anwar Ibrahim By Police & A-G’s Chambers In Datuk T Case Posted: 24 Jun 2011 08:02 PM PDT PRESS RELEASE After an unexplained delay of 3 months, the notorious ‘Datuk T’ trio were charged and convicted on June 24 for exhibiting an obscene film in public under s.292(a) of the Penal Code. As expected, the trio were let off with ‘a slap on the wrist’. However what is truly shocking is the conduct of the prosecution in court today. The prosecution submitted a statement of facts which alleged that the video recording is authentic and that an expert in the United States had found that the person in the video resembled Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim. Clearly, the authenticity of the video and the alleged identity of the person in it is completely irrelevant to the offence of exhibiting an obscene recording in public. It is highly unusual and against accepted procedure in criminal prosecutions to insert such irrelevant matters into the statement of facts. In short, the representative of the Attorney General went out of his way to smear the reputation of Anwar Ibrahim. Not being a party to the proceedings, Anwar had no opportunity to defend himself. What happened in court on June 24 was disgraceful and sickening; it is a basic rule of our legal system that court proceedings must never be used to abuse and slander absent third parties. The events in court on June 24 is clear proof of the involvement of the highest authorities, including the police leadership and the A-G’s Chambers, in the conspiracy to defame and destroy Anwar Ibrahim politically and personally. Their pretence of impartiality and independence is laughable, and widely disbelieved by the Rakyat. It is also very disturbing that the courts have allowed the authorities to misuse court process for unlawful and unjust purposes. N SURENDRAN 25 June |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Anwar Ibrahim To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Tiada ulasan:
Catat Ulasan