Malaysian judge bars evidence of a political conspiracy in Anwar’s trial

 

the ghost Altantuya is after deepak 

BY KIM QUEK

Raja Petra Kamarudin’s  interview by TV3 last night is undoubtedly a piece of political propaganda aimed at cleansing Prime Minister Najib Razak’s taint with the Altantuya murder case ahead of the Sarawak elections two days from now.

Raja Petra’s interview was centered on an affidavit he signed on 18the June 2008, in which he claimed he was reliably informed by his informer that Najib’s wife Rosmah Mansor was at the scene of the crime, witnessing the blasting of Altantuya’s body. Raja Petra now claims that he no longer believes what he believed then.

Let us be very clear on this issue at the very outset.  The veracity or otherwise of that affidavit as well as whatever belief or disbelief Raja Petra may have over the Altantuya case does not add or subtract one bit to the dark clouds that have persisted to hound Najib over this murder case.

FAILURE OF INSTITUTIONS

Such negative perceptions of Najib do not arise from so-and-so says this or that. Rather, they have accumulated over Najib’s own failure to conduct himself appropriately as well as the overtly protective shield provided by our law-enforcing institutions to keep Najib out of bound to due legal process – to the point of dereliction of duty, bordering on criminal collusion.  It is these flagrant institutional failures as well Najib’s clumsily evasive conduct that has deepened public suspicion of his involvement.

These instances are too many to enumerate, but we will mention a few to refresh public memory.

Starting with the police, there is no reason whatsoever why the police should have left Najib and his aide-de-camp Musa Safri out of its loop of investigation, when all the three accused were closely linked to Najib and it was Musa who instructed the first two accused to tackle Altantuya.

Police failure was even more glaring when it failed to act on private investigator P. Subramaniam’s all three affidavits and video interview by three senior lawyers.  The information provided by Bala in these documents not only incriminated Najib (in first affidavit), but also accused Rosmah and Najib’s brother Nazim of forcing Bala and his family to flee the country with bribe and threats (recorded in video interview and submitted via the third affidavit).  The third affidavit was in reply to Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) written questions, and submitted in July 2010.  There has been no response from MACC, despite written reminders by Bala’s lawyer.

What possible reason is there for the police and MACC to remain silent over these serious accusations, backed by factual details, against the Prime Minister and his family?  If Najib and family is innocent, wouldn’t these law enforcing bodies have sprung to action in the first instance to clear the PM and family of such horrible stigma?

BIZARRE IRREGULARITIES

The scenario in the court is even more bizarre. Revealing and critical evidence exposed in court was quickly smothered, instead of being pursued in the cause of truth and justice.  The extra-ordinary part is that the attempt to bury these new evidences was not engendered by one or two parties but by all the three parties acting in concert – prosecutor, defence and judge.

These evidences included the erasure of immigration record of Altantuya and her Mongolian companions, and an alleged photograph of Najib, Altantuya and the third accused having a meal in a restaurant.  The former evidence would have yielded important lead to some high power involvement in the case, while the latter would have nailed Najib (if proven) who had repeatedly sworn that he had never known nor met Altantuya.

This grotesque phenomenon of confluence of interest of all the judicial players to suppress new evidence can have only one explanation -  Najib must be kept out of this case.

That justice might not have been fully served through the sentencing of the first two accused to death should be obvious, when the court never bothered to probe into the motive of executing the girl – and in such cruel fashion.  It is not difficult to fathom why motive of murder was never mentioned in court.  The simple answer is: there is none.

The two convicted killers, who were bodyguards to Najib, and trained to execute order rigidly without question, had no motive on their own to kill someone they had never met.  And since the third accused, who was accused of instigating the killing, was set free due to lack of evidence, then the remaining question must be: who ordered the killing?  Is it conceivable that the bodyguards had killed without order and without motive? Isn’t it logical to deduce that the mastermind and real culprit may still be lurching somewhere beyond the realm of the court?

It is clear that major questions and swirling doubts over the handling of the case are still unresolved.  Until these are satisfactorily answered through a just court and an honourable police force, which can only be brought into existence through a complete change of political leadership, it is naïve to hope for the return of justice to the Altantuya family and the nation. And until such time, Premier Najib Razak cannot expect to be free from the haunt of Altantuya’s murder.

Anwar Ibrahim urged the police to interrogate current Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak on the murder case of Altantuya Sharribuu and the submarine deal.

Anwar further urged Najib to cooperate with the police on the matter.

He did not know who murdered Altantuya, however there were many questions which needed answers.

He (Najib) needs to be asked: how can a person assigned and worked under you commit or alleged to have committed such a heinous crime?.

Is it true that Altantuya only knew Baginda, and she did not know Najib personally? Or is it true that the DPM did not know about the murder case until the taxi driver lodged the police report? He must be called up for both accounts.

Anwar said from his own experience, a UTK?s job?was to protect the DPM and follow the instruction of the DPM.?

There are some nagging questions on why would the Special Forces personnel currently charged want to murder the victim and then take such a drastic action in an attempt to destroy the evidence? Were they acting on their own volition or were they really carrying out instructions? Who authorized the use of the C4 explosives???

He stated that it is vital that whilst those who pulled the trigger are brought to justice, all those who were responsible for directing the killing must be made known.

In fact, such persons bear greater responsibility for the crime.

Besides, Anwar also mentioned that there was the very disturbing issue about the sudden disappearance of travel documents regarding Altantuya’s movements in and out of Malaysia.

This was also reported in my story here .

Are the immigration authorities aware of this? Were there instructions from persons higher up to have these records deleted???

He said it was too early a date for the prosecution to suggest that there was no other accused to be charged on this case.

Who?do these prosecutors take orders from???

Anwar said, it is certainly unbecoming, clearly irresponsible, not transparent of the prosecution, who with malicious attempt condemn the junior officers – poor and downtrodden – but seem to immediately protect the rich and powerful?

Anwar also expressed his feeling of disgust at the conduct of investigation directed against a few junior police personnel.

There is no transparency of the investigation conducted and it is not healthy and worrying for a country that respects the rule of law.

Anwar alleged that the entire conduct of investigation of Altantuya murder case is to protect a very important personnel.

He said unless those questions were answered, no one can deny that there is an attempt to cover up the matter.

Anwar said that the public and media called upon the government to put an end of malicious prosecution and attempt to cover up the murder case.

We are appealing to the authority to change it, you can’t fool the public on this matter.

It was established that Altantuya Shariibuu was appointed or assigned by Baginda in the submarine deal, he said.

[Updated]

Anwar said there were questions over the role of Altantuya in the government?s purchase of the Scorpene and Agosta submarines from France in a deal costing nearly 1 billion euros (RM4.6 billion).

According to a report,last December, the Defence Ministry denied having paid a Malaysian-owned company US$100 million (RM370 million) as a commission for a multi-billion ringgit deal involving submarines.

However Anwar said:

We find it totally unacceptable the reasons given by the government that there is no question of corruption or accountability because the commission that was paid was between the seller and a third party, and did not involve government funds.

Anwar called it a blatant lie because no manufacturer would give such a huge commission unless?it has already been factored into the pricing of the purchases of the submarines.

He described the payment of commission of 114 million euros (RM530 million)?as exorbitant by any standard.

The public has the right to know who are the real beneficiaries of this massive payout?

Far Eastern Economic Review has reported in 2002 that Perimekar Sdn. Bhd would receive 8% of the total contract value over the next six years. Review also reported that Perimekar is owned 100% by Ombak Laut, a company wholly owned by Baginda and his associates.  Later Ombak Laut sold 40% of Perimekar to LTAT and a sister company.

How could a relatively unknown company secure such a major weapons procurement deal?

The fact that Baginda of a think tank linked closely with the DPM and Defense Minister raises a great number of questions.

Anwar said massive corruption had happened but people are reluctant to report, due to?the climate of fear and harassment, people are not able to speak up.

Why didn’t the relevant authorities such as ACA and the Commercial Crime Division begin the investigation on this matter???

He said he has waited for a long time to deliberate the murder case of Altantuya, as he felt compelled to speak out.

?I speak to the people, I look at the record from Mongolia. I don?t want to be irresponsible or to turn it into a purely political thing. It involves people?s live and future. I?ve gone through the malicious prosecution or persecution.? I don?t want it to happen to the rest.?

A PKR leader urged the police today to reveal the perpetrators behind a 1999 sex video purportedly involving Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim which was unveiled recently by a retired senior police officer.

Referring to The Malaysian Insider’sreport today, Subang MP R. Sivarasa said former KL CID chief Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim’s revelations should be verified, in view of how quickly the police had moved to investigate the latest sex video, also allegedly featuring Anwar.

“We note that that police have actively and uncharacteristically revealed details of this latest sex video at several junctures.

“PKR urges the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar to inform the public who was identified in the 1999 scandal as the perpetrators and what action was taken,” he wrote in a statement today.

In an open letter to Ismail last week, Mat Zain said he had investigated the first sex video scandal 12 years ago and suspected it was linked to the latest video.

He called for an investigation to uncover any similarities between the two cases, alleging there could be a possibility that the trio behind the latest scandal had played a role in the first video.

“Are the trio involved or played any role in the production or distribution of Sex Video I in 1999, seeing as they have been identified as having a relationship with Anwar?

“More so (Former Malacca chief minister Tan Sri Abdul) Rahim (Tamby Chik) who is believed to have cause for revenge as Anwar had accused the former Umno Youth chief of corruption just three months before Sex Video I was made public on November 24 and 25, 1999,” Mat Zain wrote in the letter.

He was referring to the “Datuk T” trio behind the latest video, namely Rahim, Perkasa treasurer-general Datuk Shuib Lazim and businessman Datuk Shazryl Eskay Abdullah, who took responsibility for the 21-minute recording, stating that their aim was to “show that a man who wants to be prime minister is not qualified.”

The mysterious “Datuk T” had first screened the video purportedly showing the opposition leader having sex with a Chinese prostitute on March 21.

Sivarasa pointed out that police reports had already been lodged on the 1999 video, which was released several days the 10th general election on November 29, and Mat Zain himself had declared that the police had identified “the source” of the video but failed to find the persons responsible for distributing it to the public.

The police said last weekend that they have wrapped up investigations into the latest video after verifying that it had not been doctored. Ismail said yesterday the Attorney-General’s Chambers has sent back the investigation papers as it needed “to be re-worked”.

“Some areas have to be re-looked at and re-worked. This is normal,” the IGP said.

On 20 September, masked men invaded a press conference at his home and took him into custody under the ISA – Internal Security Act – a hated legacy of British colonial rule. His wife Azizah, also threatened with arrest, shifted the movement she ‘inherited’ into a higher gear. A video made by Anwar before his arrest was widely circulated and his case went world-wide on the internet.In spite of a ban on meetings of more than five people, huge crowds gathered at his home and often moved defiantly onto the streets or into the mosques, where banners were unfurled demanding an end to Mahathir’s corrupt regime. When Anwar appeared in court with a swollen face, black eye and bruises, and later with a neck brace, Mahathir claimed the injuries were self-inflicted!
After years of isolation from public opinion, surrounded by flatterers and toadies, a virtual dictator like Mahathir can totally misjudge how far he can stretch credulity. Outrage was universal. Protests grew larger and noisier. A High Court judge has now scheduled Anwar’s trial to re-start from 2 November, with a recess that conveniently coincides with an APEC conference in Kuala Lumpur involving Asian heads of state.
But how far can a movement go that is based largely amongst professionals and business people, whose main aim is to break down cronyism to advance their own interests? Azizah said: ‘We are not trying to set up something new. The basic structure is there. All you have to do is remove the oppression’. Yet the cracks opened up by this public spat inside the ruling layers – brought about by economic and social stagnation – can open the way for other layers of society to lay their claims to a better deal.Anwar, though a campaigner against poverty in his student days (for which he was imprisoned), has since been in the camp of the enemies of labour. No one should be fooled by his populist messages from prison, ‘we must save the country from being exploited by a handful of individuals out to manipulate the economy to amass wealth for themselves’. Anwar is a firm supporter of capitalism in Malaysia – of massive profit-making and the gross exploitation of the mass of the population. He participated in a cabinet that ratified the arrest and harassment of even the mildest dissidents and which used the very ISA his supporters now demand should be abolished.

Last December he displayed his orthodox neo-liberal credentials by pushing through a programme of austerity measures. They were, inevitably, an attempt to rescue the Malaysian economy at the expense of the working class and other oppressed layers. These failed to stem the disaster of an economy moving rapidly into decline. Mahathir has been able to blame Anwar, along with all free-market enthusiasts, for the continuing financial disaster. He has taken over as finance minister and, with the ‘protection’ of monetary controls, has reduced interest rates, introduced budget deficits (8% of GDP this year), and pumped $3.4bn into infrastructure projects.Some analysts think these measures could lift the economy temporarily and give Mahathir a little respite, but the political opposition to his rule may have already reached a point where it will be difficult to contain. Critics note he is still authorising expensive measures like the $2.63bn government ‘bail-out’ which amounts to a form of nationalisation for Renong Bhd. Once the ‘investment arm’ of the ruling UMNO party, Renong “has nine listed companies in its stable and interests in toll-road operations, construction and engineering, property development, telecommunications, financial services, oil and natural gas” (Wall Street Journal, 9 October).
Towards the middle of this year, Mahathir denounced foreign speculators and a ‘new form of colonial domination’, using his own brand of populist anti-imperialist rhetoric. After the mass movement in Indonesia had brought down Suharto towards the end of May, voices were raised in UMNO, warning Mahathir to clean up his corrupt administration. He claims he was considering standing down. Now, after arresting his own protégé, he claims he cannot step down because there is no successor!Mahathir’s decision in September to break with the IMF’s conditions caused panic amongst the world’s financiers. Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore said ‘developing countries’ were watching to see which economic model – free market or capital controls – succeeded in overcoming the immediate problems: ‘I feel we are going to have a backing away from a globalised financial system’ (International Herald Tribune).

Whatever the outcome of this ugly power struggle, it already means that the country will never be the same. If millions of workers have had difficulty combating the pro-government stance of the main union federation, a breach in the regime’s authority, especially the winning of democratic reforms, will give them the confidence to develop their own independent unions.Politically, two new overlapping party and NGO alliances were announced on 27 September. The People’s Justice Movement (GKR) involves 17 organisations including the Islamic PAS. And the Coalition for People’s Democracy (GDR) has 18 predominantly secular organisations, including the People’s Party (PRM), Socialist Party, Democratic Action (DAP) and PAS. These will probably be temporary formations pushing the demands of the ‘reformasi’ movement.
Socialists will support the democratic slogans – for the abolition of the ISA, the release of those detained under it, for basic rights and the freedom of the press, assembly, elections, etc. But, to begin to solve the problems confronting the mass of workers, they will have to go further than the movement around Anwar is prepared to go. As in Indonesia and elsewhere, middle-class fighters will content themselves with a first victory over despotic rule and try and open up ownership and control in society for themselves.
The working class, by developing its own organisations and fighting strength, must do the same – but that means breaking with all forms of capitalist rule, not just today’s cronyism. Without eliminating private ownership of the major conglomerates and of land, the massive crises of capitalism will never be overcome. The traditions of socialist struggle will be revived in Malaysia under the impact of events. Not only will more tyrants fall. The system they have held together by brute force will be replaced, through victorious revolutionary movements, leading to the victory of socialism in Asia and beyond.
Elizabeth Clarke

 

The first offering of the 

Malaysian judge bars evidence of a political conspiracy in Anwar’s trial

., “The Conspirator“ centers around the aftermath of the  and the country’s search for justice at any cost. Directed by malaysiakita786., the film chronicles the trial and conviction of Anwar Ibrahim,

“The Conspirator” If anyone had any doubts as to the political and biased character of the legal proceedings against former Malaysian deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim then the events of the week should have been enough to dispel them.

The trial restarted on Monday after a break of more than a week to allow defence lawyers time to prepare the case in light of substantial last-minute amendments by the prosecution to the four charges of corruption. The first defence witness to take the stand was Anwar himself who gave evidence and was cross-examined by prosecution lawyers.

The nervousness of the government of Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad over Anwar’s testimony was underscored by the decision of Attorney-General Mochtar Abdullah to turn up unexpectedly in court on Monday to take over the leadership of the prosecution team.

Mochtar told the court that he had not done so earlier only because he had previously expected to be called as a witness. But the real reason was all too evident. The Mahathir government had to have one of its own in the court room in order to prevent Anwar from revealing too much about its internal operations. At one point, Mochtar pointedly warned Anwar about divulging “state secrets”.

Anwar, who was sacked from his positions last year and expelled from the ruling United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), is charged with having used his position to influence police to compel two people to withdraw written allegations of sexual misconduct against him. He is also facing a further charge of corruption and five charges of sexual misconduct.

Since he was seized under Malaysia’s draconian Internal Security Act (ISA), Anwar has maintained that he is innocent of all charges. In the course of the prosecution case, his defence lawyers effectively undermined the credibility of the two people who had made the allegations and began to link them to a high-level conspiracy against Anwar involving Mahathir’s private secretary, Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin and Consumer Affairs Minister Megat Junid.

At the end of its case, the prosecution lawyers made a highly unusual application to the presiding High Court judge Augustine Paul to change the wording of the charges so that it was no longer necessary to prove that the original written allegations were true. Not only did Paul agree to the prosecution motion but he also expunged evidence of sexual misconduct from the record. Anwar’s lawyers are now unable to challenge in court the lurid sex stories that have been splashed through the Malaysian media for weeks.

In the course of the last week, Paul has made a series of highly political rulings making it virtually impossible for Anwar to present evidence of a high level plot against him, and thus severely restricting the defence case.

On Monday, Anwar testified that he had encouraged police to look into the allegations even though they were made in letters that were written by his enemies. He stated that he had not asked police to arrest the two who had made the accusations or to force retractions from them.

He explained that as chairman of the committee on government management and corruption he had been privy to many allegations against ministers and state officials. He had been involved in investigating the alleged waste of billions of ringgit in the Department of Public Works and the Ministry of Defence.

The prosecution challenged the testimony, claiming that his position as chairman of the committee was irrelevant to the case. Anwar has alleged that one of the reasons for the conspiracy against him was that officials and ministers feared the committee would expose them. Justice Paul upheld the prosecution objection, thus preventing any details of corrupt activity from being aired on court.

On Tuesday, Anwar gave evidence that in August and September 1997, Special Branch police officers had informed him of a high-level political conspiracy involving Zainuddin and Junid. Earlier in the day he explained that he had met on August 31, 1997 with Mahathir who said the allegations were baseless.

But as the defence lawyers sought to pursue the issues, Justice Paul intervened to block the line of questioning. In a sweeping ruling, he stated: “Evidence of political conspiracy, if any, is irrelevant…the issue of political conspiracy is too remote.” He insisted that Anwar should stick to proving that he never abused his powers to cover up alleged sexual trysts.

Even within the strict terms of the case, the decision is deeply flawed. Senior police claim that Anwar ordered them to extract confessions. He denies it. If Anwar is to prove the police are lying then he has to be able to adduce evidence to explain how and why. By ruling that the defence cannot enter any evidence of a high level conspiracy between the police, government ministers and officials, the judge has denied Anwar any active defence.

Taken within the broader political context of the trial, the judge’s decision directly serves the interests of the Mahathir government both by preparing the basis for a guilty verdict, and preventing his inside knowledge of its activities from being aired in court.

This was confirmed the following day when Justice Paul placed a ban on the press reporting Anwar’s statements concerning discussions he had held with Mahathir or the former chief of police. He also ordered the media not to report what Anwar had said about the International Trade Minister Rafidah Aziz.

According to Anwar, the conflict with Mahathir arose as sharp differences emerged over economic policy. The decision to lay the charges was made after a confrontation with Mahathir on the day of his dismissal–September 2. The prime minister had delivered an ultimatum to resign or to face charges of sexual misconduct.

The conduct of the Anwar trial has broad political implications for working people in Malaysia. If, in the glare of the international media, the rights of a former deputy prime minister to mount a legal defence to politically motivated charges can be flagrantly violated, the same anti-democratic measures can be used with impunity against workers and young people.