(RPK – the man who always been on the offensive. Image source : http://www.impunitywatch.com)
Read RPK’s latest post on Najib & Saiful and he said:-
And how will that happen? Well, this time I video-recorded a ‘confession’ session. And the video recording is now in a safe place, ready to surface during my trial when they charge me for this newest ‘crime’, whatever that crime is going to be.
The gist is as follows. When Saiful went to meet Najib, he brought a friend along. And this friend has confessed to the entire thing in a video recording, which I now have in my possession. So bring it on. Give me all you’ve got. Charge me and let us see what happens in court.
Najib will be be in deep, deep in trouble if the video confession is going to reveal damaging notes on the DPM. Aisehman in his reaction to this said
Najib is toast. Man, you never gonna be PM. My heartfelt condolences to Rosmah
Things are certainly heating up in the run toward the September deadline by Anwar. Need to keep a close eye on the next few days.
In the meantime, inflation has hit Malaysia at 7.7%, the highest in the last 26 years! It looks like we need the change of Government, more urgently now.
No tags for this post.No tags for this post.
Dear Joe
I am somewhat perplexed to say the least if not horrified after reading your posting on the Anwwar Ibrahim matter (his impending trial on sodomy charges). Your thoughts appear to belie a prejudice and a view you have already formed on the matter.
I have taken the time to read about yourself. Perhpas I should not have. But where you describe yourself as a lawyer you leave a lot to be desired. Your writing skills you boast of and the quality of what you present here defies your description of yourself as a lawyer.
I ams sure your heart is in the right place. Perhaps you should like many of your counterparts in the profession make a greater effort to articulate yourselves when you try to make a point especially if it c oncerns the law.
Anwars case is about the law. He has a case to Answer. It may not be to the liking of a loud chorus of disgruntled minions of the Anwar camp, but it is something Anwwar has to contend with. And continue repreating the villifcation or indivudals and the defamatory comments of Raja Petra Kamaruddin on your blog is rather patehtic.
In truth, I do find your blog somewhat more balanced than that of most even if it is peppered with the vandalism and graffitti of the likes of RPK and your apparent unbriddled support of anwar Ibrahim martyr extraordinaire.
Anwar Ibrahim is not above the law. Where he stands accused of an offence so vile and so reulsive, the obligation he has under the law is to defend the charge and not politicise it. His threats to take it abroad underlies his scant regard for Malaysia’s laws or the rule of law as a principle.
I hope you will make the effort with whatever resources you have at your disposal to mitigate your reputation as a legal practitioner to present a more cogent argument or compelling peice of work on whatever it is you choose to comment on in future.
Perhaps you ought to go to the following blog and comment on it if you feel inclined to:
http://takemon.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/fraud-the-malaysian-bar/
Gopal raj Kumar
Hi Gopal
Thanks for your comments. What can I say? I am guilty as charged! I am pro-opposition and indirectly pro-Anwar (which makes me pro-RPK as well).
It is interesting on your note that “Anwars case is about the law”. Yes it is but look what the police and the prosecution is doing:-
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/7/16/nation/20090716131000&sec=nation
In this country, a man is innocent until proven guilty WITHOUT A SHADOW OF DOUBT. It did not make any sense for the prosecution to withhold crucial documents from the defence. It is something that the High Court judge, Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah in his decision to grant the Anwar’s request for crucial documents think so.
Despite this, prosecution is appealing against the High Court ruling. Why?
Withholding crucial documents from the defence was one of the reason why the Maguire Seven spend up to 14 years in jail despite being innocent.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guildford_Four_and_Maguire_Seven#Maguire_Seven
If Anwar is to face the courts, fine but do things proper. The way the police and the AG is playing “hide and seek” with documents and delays itself makes wonder what the case is indeed about the law and nothing else
I think your analysis is somewhat skewered to a political rather than legal issues and thats dangerous because it blinds you to the issues that are being dealt with here.
Anwar raises those issues which are about the law. I am merely responding to them. Perhaps you should then ask Anwar (seeing as you are confessed supporter of the man or his party) to avoid legal issues which he appears to lack an understanding of.
Lets deal with the issues of what the police and prosecution are doing. Lets star by giving you (and Anwar) the benefit of the doubt in this case.
If the prosecution is doing something which, from your dissection of the matter appears either immoral, illegal or improper, why imitate them? Since when did the morals of an opposition (including that of yourself, Anwar and the PKR) come from the BN, the prosecution or the police whom you do not like or agree with, that you should use what you condemn about them to be your guiding light? are you suggesting it is justifiable for Anwar and PKR to be wrong because the police and the prosecution in his matter is wrong?
In most countries (not just Malaysia) a person charged with a criminal offence is presumed innocent (subject to certain exceptions) until he is found guilty after due process of law has been followed. Thats the meaning of the maxim.Due process means a fair trial and not what the defence alone decides is fair.
And for that Anwar has to be tried on all the evidence available to the prosecution to bring about a finding of guilt.
In such circumstances it were beetter than he remain silent unlike what Anwar and his lawyers are doing now.
They have become selectively responsive even before a full brief has been prepared. It undermines their defence. You do not have to be a lawyer to work that one out.
It does make sense for the prosecution (as the opportunity is available to an intelligent defence team) to withold if required critical documents about
their case till the appropriate time.
Its a tactical advantage they seek to avail themselves of to use at the appropriate time to be establish the truth of their assumptions. Remember that this is an adversarial contest and not one that is inquisitorial.
I have little time or professional respect for either Nair or Sivarasa because of their tendency to politicise the law. Theey act very unintelligently in furthering their own professionally sullied reputations which unfortunately translates into media hero status in their minds and in some ill informed quarters.
The judge has a right to his opinion. Its not a decision that he has made or a judgement he has passed in this matter. So I do not seee the point.
The MacGuire 7 case has no similarities to this. There there was criminal interference by the prosecution. The facts were rather different and the analogy must fail.
In Anwar’s case there is medical evidence which may be admissible. Sivarassa and his team say not. Anwar may or may not be eeventually tried on this charge. But thats for when the time comes and I will not elaborate on it here.
But Bala let me say this in passsing. You at least have the courage to allow free discussion on these subjects and the moral fortitude to admit your political leanings.
This quality makes you as a blogger different to the other tripe on the net that blogging has unfortunately become victim to especially in Malaysia.
For that I think you stand out and your efforrts are a contribution rather than the floatsam jetsom that clogs the bloggs.
Gopal Raj Kumar