Najib why Alatantuya have to die Rule By Law not Rule Of Law

Later, a series of text messages was made public indicating that Najib had been involved in finding a lawyer, Shafee Abdullah, to represent Abdul Razak. One message from Shafee to Najib said: "We provided (the police) everything, including old PDAs and notebooks and a couple of bills. Nothing incriminating." Malaysia Today said the exchange raises questions if anything "incriminating" was kept from the police.
 a similar division of forces occurred when a Mongolian witness – a girlfriend of the victim told the court that immigration entry computer records of the deceased and her two Mongolian companions, including the witness, had been mysteriously erased. When Singh asked the court to take proper note of this highly irregular event, both the prosecution and defense objected to the evidence as irrelevant, and insisted that it be expunged.

Is this the man?
The custodian of the dying ember?
The man who generations to come will remember as the last man standing, before the new dawn set in?
OR
Is this the man who is going to set in an even more harsh regime?
To ensure he and his team will have a long run on the nation?
Driven by chauvinism, and detested by the international as well as the domestic society?
Is this the start of a dynasty in the Malaysian Public Life?
Does this mean that we Malaysians are so incapable that we need a select few families to tell us how to live our lives?
Are we so dependent that all aspects of our lives need to be controlled?
Are we so handicapped that we need these political dynasties to teach how to interact with each other?
CAN WE THE MALAYSIAN PEOPLE RISE TO THE OCCASSION WHEN THE NATION NEEDS US?
CAN MALAYSIA DEPEND ON US? 

An unbelievable spectacle took place in the bizarre murder trial of Mongolian beauty Altantuya Shaaribuu on June 29. Karpal Singh, the lawyer for the victim’s family, attempted to ask a question about a “government official” allegedly seen in a photograph with the victim. At that point, both the prosecutor and the defense lawyer sprang to their feet in unison to block the question.


This resulted in a shouting match, with Singh on one side, the victim’s cousin on the stand, and the combined forces of the prosecution and defense blocking the line of questioning.


Earlier, a similar division of forces occurred when a Mongolian witness – a girlfriend of the victim told the court that immigration entry computer records of the deceased and her two Mongolian companions, including the witness, had been mysteriously erased. When Singh asked the court to take proper note of this highly irregular event, both the prosecution and defense objected to the evidence as irrelevant, and insisted that it be expunged.


Now, isn’t that a strange phenomenon? A prosecutor is supposed to seek justice for the deceased victim’s family against the murderers, so how come the prosecutor is now ganging up with defense lawyers to oppose the victim’s family lawyer? Is this a case of prosecutor vs. defense or a case of prosecutor plus defense vs. victim’s family? Obviously, the prosecution and defense seem to have plenty of common interests. What are those common interests?


The answer may lie in the identity of that “government official” that allegedly appeared in the photograph with Altantuya that both prosecution and defense tried so hard not to allow into court.
On Day 10 of the trial, Altantuya’s cousin Burmaa Oyunchimeg testified that after Altantuya returned from France, she went to Hong Kong to meet Burmaa, and showed her a photograph of Altantuya and her lover, Abdul Razak Baginda, who is accused of conspiring in her murder, and “a government official” taking a meal together. Answering Singh later, after the shouting match in the court had subsided, she said this “government official” was Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.


She could distinctly remember the name, she said, because it bears a similarity to Altantuya’s acknowledged lover’s name, and she even asked Altantuya whether they were brothers. Burmaa further added that the photo had also been shown to Altantuya’s father.


Now, the revelation of Najib in the photo would not have caused such a sensation if not for the deputy prime minister’s oft-repeated denial of any knowledge of Altantuya, including a public denial during a recent by-election, when even the name of Allah was invoked.


What does Najib have to say now that his denial is directly contradicted by the witness Burmaa? His press secretary Tengku Sarifuddin Tengku Ahmad issued a brief statement on June 30 saying that the deputy prime minister had declined to comment for two reasons. One, any comment might be sub judice, since the case is in court, and, two, Najib had already repeatedly denied an acquaintance with the girl in the past, “as such, the issue over the picture does not arise,” the spokesman said.


Sub judice? That’s ridiculous. How could a simple statement like “I have never had my photo taken with Altantuya” be sub judice? In fact, being the number-two leader in the government, Najib is absolutely duty-bound to say outright whether he was ever photographed with Altantuya, in view of the serious implications of Burmaa’s allegation.


The issue over the picture does not arise? Equally ridiculous. In fact, the opposite is true. Precisely because of Najib’s past denials, it is all the more imperative that Najib must stand up now to clarify.


Guilty conscience?


There is only one explanation for Najib’s past denials and his present silence: A guilty conscience. If Najib’s conduct with respect to the case had been above-board, there would be no reason for him to deny an acquaintance with his friend Abdul Razak’s friend Altantuya. Similarly, if the allegation of the picture is false, it is inconceivable and totally incomprehensible that Najib should have chosen not to refute Burmaa’s allegation.


In fact, Najib seems so worried about the publicity of the picture that his secretary called editors in the local press and requested them not to blow up the issue. This resulted in the explosive story being absent from the local headlines the next day. (In one Chinese paper – Guang Ming – the Najib story hit the front page in the evening edition, but disappeared completely by the next morning). And of course, Anwar Ibrahim’s criticism of the trial and his specific call on Najib to clarify the issue of the picture during a press conference was generally blacked out.


However, despite such new suppression, irreversible damage is done. There is little doubt that Najib is deeply troubled and his political position seriously weakened.

Now, isn’t that a strange phenomenon? A prosecutor is supposed to seek justice for the deceased victim’s family against the murderers, so how come the prosecutor is now ganging up with defense lawyers to oppose the victim’s family lawyer? Is this a case of prosecutor vs. defense or a case of prosecutor plus defense vs. victim’s family? Obviously, the prosecution and defense seem to have plenty of common interests. What are those common interests?


The answer may lie in the identity of that “government official” that allegedly appeared in the photograph with Altantuya that both prosecution and defense tried so hard not to allow into court.
On Day 10 of the trial, Altantuya’s cousin Burmaa Oyunchimeg testified that after Altantuya returned from France, she went to Hong Kong to meet Burmaa, and showed her a photograph of Altantuya and her lover, Abdul Razak Baginda, who is accused of conspiring in her murder, and “a government official” taking a meal together. Answering Singh later, after the shouting match in the court had subsided, she said this “government official” was Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

Besides allegations that Altantuya was the lover of both men, the case has raised additional concerns of corruption at the top of the United Malays National Organisation, the leading political party in the national ruling coalition. The Mongolian woman appears to have been the translator on a controversial transaction in which Malaysia, with Najib as defense minister, paid €1 billion for French submarines, netting a company tied to Abdul Razak US$111 million in “commissions.”

NAZIM, DEEPAK, DINESH, SURESH, ASP MUNIANDY,AMBALABALAN SHOULD ALL BE CHARGED FOR CONSPIRACY TO WITHHOLD INFORMATION REGARDING A MURDER CASE,t Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had seen a full report by military intelligence on the involvement of the deputy premier’s family. Badawi gave the intelligence report to his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, for safekeepingNonetheless, Judge Mohd Zaki dismissed a bid in July to call Najib as a witness in the trial. Zaki also refused to call Balasubramaniam despite his written declaration, which implicated Najib in the events leading up to the murder. In addition to other lurid details, Balasubramaniam described text messages between Najib and Abdul Razak in which the latter was asking for help to avoid arrest.Nonetheless, Judge Mohd Zaki dismissed a bid in July to call Najib as a witness in the trial. Zaki also refused to call Balasubramaniam despite his written declaration, which implicated Najib in the events leading up to the murder. In addition to other lurid details, Balasubramaniam described text messages between Najib and Abdul Razak in which the latter was asking for help to avoid arrest.

According to evidence introduced at the trial and other sources, Abdul Razak contacted Najib’s chief of staff, Musa Safri, to ask Najib’s bodyguards, Azilah and Sirul, to “do something” about Altantuya. Musa was not required to appear as a witness. Deputy Commander Mastor Mohd Ariff, an associate of the two bodyguards, said members of the unit were required to follow all orders of their superiors without question, describing the unit’s members as “like robots” who would only take orders from their superiors. Abdul Razak, a civilian and friend of Najib’s, was not a superior officer.According to an affidavit filed by Abdul Razak, Azilah contacted Abdul Razak after Altantuya’s disappearance to say that “tonight encik (sir), you can sleep well.”
Testimony by the murdered woman’s cousin indicated that immigration records of Altantuya and the two Mongolian companions who had come toMalaysia with her to confront Abdul Razak disappeared from the government’s immigration files. She also responded to a question that she had seen a picture of Altantuya having dinner with Najib before she was hurriedly hushed up by both prosecution and defense lawyers.

Several politicians and individuals have raised their concern by asking how Najib could be so sure about it. If it were true, then how come nobody asked the question “Who gave the order to kill Altantuya?” in the High Court during the trial of the convicted duo, Sirul and accomplice Azilah Hadri. This would have proven that indeed Sirul and Azilah acted on their own!

After the murder of Altantuya, a charitable soul contacted Shaaribuu Setev, the father of the young woman : Datuk Syed, honorary consul of Mongolia in Malaysia. “I am ready to do everything to help you”, said the diplomat to Shaaribuu Setev. His dedication even pushed the amicable Datuk Syed to make revelations to the father. “The Malaysian governement is ready to spend one billion of tughrik (mongolian currency, equivalent to 500,000 euros) to cover up the case”

"It's total rubbish, total rubbish," Datuk Seri Najib Razak said, shaking his head to reporters after attending the Chinese New Year open house at Wisma MCA, referring to former police commando Sirul Azhar Omar that he was under orders to commit the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu.Just look at the tragedy that  Najib has become total rubbish .What kind of political rubbish is this? What’s the point in discussing issues in debates on TV, when the same issues cannot be discussed in Parliament?Democracy is still the best known civilized form of governing a country.  Sure it has many flaws depending on each country. Unfortunately over the last 50 years, our democracy has become more flawed rather than improving. Malaysia has its own share of aberrations piled up during the last fifty years. GUILTY CONSCIENCE?

THERE IS ONLY ONE EXPLANATION FOR NAJIB’S PAST DENIALS AND HIS PRESENT SILENCE: A GUILTY CONSCIENCE. IF NAJIB’S CONDUCT WITH RESPECT TO THE CASE HAD BEEN ABOVE-BOARD, THERE WOULD BE NO REASON FOR HIM TO DENY AN ACQUAINTANCE WITH HIS FRIEND ABDUL RAZAK’S FRIEND ALTANTUYA. SIMILARLY, IF THE ALLEGATION OF THE PICTURE IS FALSE, IT IS INCONCEIVABLE AND TOTALLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE THAT NAJIB SHOULD HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO REFUTE BURMAA’S ALLEGATION.

IN FACT, NAJIB SEEMS SO WORRIED ABOUT THE PUBLICITY OF THE PICTURE THAT HIS SECRETARY CALLED EDITORS IN THE LOCAL PRESS AND REQUESTED THEM NOT TO BLOW UP THE ISSUE. THIS RESULTED IN THE EXPLOSIVE STORY BEING ABSENT FROM THE LOCAL HEADLINES THE NEXT DAY. (IN ONE CHINESE PAPER – GUANG MING – THE NAJIB STORY HIT THE FRONT PAGE IN THE EVENING EDITION, BUT DISAPPEARED COMPLETELY BY THE NEXT MORNING). AND OF COURSE, ANWAR IBRAHIM’S CRITICISM OF THE TRIAL AND HIS SPECIFIC CALL ON NAJIB TO CLARIFY THE ISSUE OF THE PICTURE DURING A PRESS CONFERENCE WAS GENERALLY BLACKED OUT.

HOWEVER, DESPITE SUCH NEW SUPPRESSION, IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE IS DONE. THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THAT NAJIB IS DEEPLY TROUBLED AND HIS POLITICAL POSITION SERIOUSLY WEAKENED.ON DAY 10 OF THE TRIAL, ALTANTUYA’S COUSIN BURMAA OYUNCHIMEG TESTIFIED THAT AFTER ALTANTUYA RETURNED FROM FRANCE, SHE WENT TO HONG KONG TO MEET BURMAA, AND SHOWED HER A PHOTOGRAPH OF ALTANTUYA AND HER LOVER, ABDUL RAZAK BAGINDA, WHO IS ACCUSED OF CONSPIRING IN HER MURDER, AND “A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL” TAKING A MEAL TOGETHER. ANSWERING SINGH LATER, AFTER THE SHOUTING MATCH IN THE COURT HAD SUBSIDED, SHE SAID THIS “GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL” WAS DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER NAJIB TUN RAZAK.

SHE COULD DISTINCTLY REMEMBER THE NAME, SHE SAID, BECAUSE IT BEARS A SIMILARITY TO ALTANTUYA’S ACKNOWLEDGED LOVER’S NAME, AND SHE EVEN ASKED ALTANTUYA WHETHER THEY WERE BROTHERS. BURMAA FURTHER ADDED THAT THE PHOTO HAD ALSO BEEN SHOWN TO ALTANTUYA’S FATHER.

NOW, THE REVELATION OF NAJIB IN THE PHOTO WOULD NOT HAVE CAUSED SUCH A SENSATION IF NOT FOR THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER’S OFT-REPEATED DENIAL OF ANY KNOWLEDGE OF ALTANTUYA, INCLUDING A PUBLIC DENIAL DURING A RECENT BY-ELECTION, WHEN EVEN THE NAME OF ALLAH WAS INVOKED.

WHAT DOES NAJIB HAVE TO SAY NOW THAT HIS DENIAL IS DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED BY THE WITNESS BURMAA? HIS PRESS SECRETARY TENGKU SARIFUDDIN TENGKU AHMAD ISSUED A BRIEF STATEMENT ON JUNE 30 SAYING THAT THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER HAD DECLINED TO COMMENT FOR TWO REASONS. ONE, ANY COMMENT MIGHT BE SUB JUDICE, SINCE THE CASE IS IN COURT, AND, TWO, NAJIB HAD ALREADY REPEATEDLY DENIED AN ACQUAINTANCE WITH THE GIRL IN THE PAST, “AS SUCH, THE ISSUE OVER THE PICTURE DOES NOT ARISE,” THE SPOKESMAN SAID.

SUB JUDICE? THAT’S RIDICULOUS. HOW COULD A SIMPLE STATEMENT LIKE “I HAVE NEVER HAD MY PHOTO TAKEN WITH ALTANTUYA” BE SUB JUDICE? IN FACT, BEING THE NUMBER-TWO LEADER IN THE GOVERNMENT, NAJIB IS ABSOLUTELY DUTY-BOUND TO SAY OUTRIGHT WHETHER HE WAS EVER PHOTOGRAPHED WITH ALTANTUYA, IN VIEW OF THE SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS OF BURMAA’S ALLEGATION.

THE ISSUE OVER THE PICTURE DOES NOT ARISE? EQUALLY RIDICULOUS. IN FACT, THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. PRECISELY BECAUSE OF NAJIB’S PAST DENIALS, IT IS ALL THE MORE IMPERATIVE THAT NAJIB MUST STAND UP NOW TO CLARIFY.

GUILTY CONSCIENCE?

THERE IS ONLY ONE EXPLANATION FOR NAJIB’S PAST DENIALS AND HIS PRESENT SILENCE: A GUILTY CONSCIENCE. IF NAJIB’S CONDUCT WITH RESPECT TO THE CASE HAD BEEN ABOVE-BOARD, THERE WOULD BE NO REASON FOR HIM TO DENY AN ACQUAINTANCE WITH HIS FRIEND ABDUL RAZAK’S FRIEND ALTANTUYA. SIMILARLY, IF THE ALLEGATION OF THE PICTURE IS FALSE, IT IS INCONCEIVABLE AND TOTALLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE THAT NAJIB SHOULD HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO REFUTE BURMAA’S ALLEGATION.

IN FACT, NAJIB SEEMS SO WORRIED ABOUT THE PUBLICITY OF THE PICTURE THAT HIS SECRETARY CALLED EDITORS IN THE LOCAL PRESS AND REQUESTED THEM NOT TO BLOW UP THE ISSUE. THIS RESULTED IN THE EXPLOSIVE STORY BEING ABSENT FROM THE LOCAL HEADLINES THE NEXT DAY. (IN ONE CHINESE PAPER – GUANG MING – THE NAJIB STORY HIT THE FRONT PAGE IN THE EVENING EDITION, BUT DISAPPEARED COMPLETELY BY THE NEXT MORNING). AND OF COURSE, ANWAR IBRAHIM’S CRITICISM OF THE TRIAL AND HIS SPECIFIC CALL ON NAJIB TO CLARIFY THE ISSUE OF THE PICTURE DURING A PRESS CONFERENCE WAS GENERALLY BLACKED OUT.

HOWEVER, DESPITE SUCH NEW SUPPRESSION, IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE IS DONE. THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THAT NAJIB IS DEEPLY TROUBLED AND HIS POLITICAL POSITION SERIOUSLY WEAKENED.

MANIPULATION

THAT THIS MURDER CASE HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO SERIOUS POLITICAL MANIPULATION HAS BEEN OBVIOUS FROM THE VERY START, WHEN THE POLICE COMMENCED THEIR HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE INVESTIGATION, RIGHT THROUGH TO THE PRESENT TRIAL WHEN THE CONDUCT OF LAWYERS FOR BOTH SIDES APPEAR INCREASINGLY DUBIOUS. INSTEAD OF THE PROSECUTOR SEEKING THE TRUTH AND THE DEFENSE LAWYER FIGHTING FOR THE ACCUSED, BOTH SEEM PREOCCUPIED WITH AN OVERRIDING MISSION – TO PREVENT THE WHOLE TRUTH FROM EMERGING. THEIR COMBINED EFFORTS TO COVER UP THE ISSUE OF THE IMMIGRATION RECORD AND THE IDENTITY OF NAJIB RAZAK IN THE PICTURE ARE JUST TWO EXAMPLES OF SUCH CONDUCT.

THE HIGHLY IRREGULAR NATURE OF THIS CASE WAS ALSO MARKED BY FREQUENT AND MYSTERIOUS CHANGES OF LEGAL PERSONNEL, RESULTING IN A COMPLETE CHANGEOVER OF THE DEFENSE TEAM, THE PROSECUTORS AND THE JUDGE EVEN BEFORE THE HEARINGS BEGAN. THESE WEIRD PHENOMENA WERE CROWNED BY THE SHOCK APPEARANCE OF A NEW TEAM OF PROSECUTORS WHO WERE APPOINTED ONLY HOURS BEFORE THE HEARING WAS SUPPOSED TO BEGIN, THUS NECESSITATING AN IMPROMPTU POSTPONEMENT OF THE TRIAL FOR TWO WEEKS. NONE OF THESE CHANGES OF LEGAL PERSONNEL HAS BEEN PROPERLY EXPLAINED, EXCEPT FOR THE RESIGNATION OF ABDUL RAZAK’S FIRST LAWYER; ZULKIFLI NOORDIN, QUIT, HE SAID, BECAUSE OF “SERIOUS INTERFERENCE BY THIRD PARTIES”.

UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PUBLIC MUST BRACE ITSELF FOR MORE ABERRANT SCENARIOS FROM THIS COURT, WHILE NAJIB AND HIS SUPPORTERS MAY HAVE TO KEEP THEIR FINGERS CROSSED IN THE DAYS AHEAD WHEN MANY MORE WITNESSES HAVE YET TO WALK THROUGH WHAT MUST APPEAR TO NAJIB AS A MINEFIELD.

ON A MORE SERIOUS NOTE, THIS UNSEEMLY TRIAL DOES NOT EXACTLY ADD CREDIT TO MALAYSIA’S SYSTEM, WHOSE ALREADY WRETCHED IMAGE HAS JUST BEEN FURTHER MAULED BY THE SHAMEFUL FINALE OF ANOTHER SHAM TRIAL – THAT OF ERIC CHIA OF PERWAJA STEEL FAME. AFTER SEVEN LONG YEARS OF INVESTIGATIONS AND THREE YEARS OF COURT HEARINGS, THAT CASE WAS THROWN OUT DUE TO LACK OF PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE. WITH THAT, THE LONG-DRAWN OUT PERWAJA STEEL SAGA ENDED WITHOUT FINDING ANY CULPRIT FOR THE MOUNTAIN OF LOSSES (MORE THAN RM 10 BILLION) SUFFERED BY TAXPAYERS.

THERE HAS BEEN A SPATE OF CRIMINAL CASES BEING DISMISSED OF LATE DUE TO INADEQUATE INVESTIGATIONS AND POOR PROSECUTION, INDICATING THAT THE DOWNWARD SLIDE OF OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, WHICH BEGAN IN THE MAHATHIR ERA, HAS GOTTEN WORSE UNDER ABDULLAH BADAWI’S LEADERSHIP. WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN A SHAMBLES, THE RULE OF LAW IS IN JEOPARDY. AND THAT IS AN IMPORTANT BENCHMARK TO JUDGE THE EFFICACY OF ABDULLAH’S ADMINISTRATION VIS-À-VIS HIS REFORM AGENDA.

The point I am trying to make is in our anger against the flaws of democracy we should not be tempted to throw away the system itself. Anything that follows will be worse.  

Nonetheless, Judge Mohd Zaki dismissed a bid in July to call Najib as a witness in the trial. Zaki also refused to call Balasubramaniam despite his written declaration, which implicated Najib in the events leading up to the murder. In addition to other lurid details, Balasubramaniam described text messages between Najib and Abdul Razak in which the latter was asking for help to avoid arrest.

According to evidence introduced at the trial and other sources, Abdul Razak contacted Najib’s chief of staff, Musa Safri, to ask Najib’s bodyguards, Azilah and Sirul, to “do something” about Altantuya. Musa was not required to appear as a witness. Deputy Commander Mastor Mohd Ariff, an associate of the two bodyguards, said members of the unit were required to follow all orders of their superiors without question, describing the unit’s members as “like robots” who would only take orders from their superiors. Abdul Razak, a civilian and friend of Najib’s, was not a superior officer.According to an affidavit filed by Abdul Razak, Azilah contacted Abdul Razak after Altantuya’s disappearance to say that “tonight encik (sir), you can sleep well.”
Testimony by the murdered woman’s cousin indicated that immigration records of Altantuya and the two Mongolian companions who had come toMalaysia with her to confront Abdul Razak disappeared from the government’s immigration files. She also responded to a question that she had seen a picture of Altantuya having dinner with Najib before she was hurriedly hushed up by both prosecution and defense lawyers.

Several politicians and individuals have raised their concern by asking how Najib could be so sure about it. If it were true, then how come nobody asked the question “Who gave the order to kill Altantuya?” in the High Court during the trial of the convicted duo, Sirul and accomplice Azilah Hadri. This would have proven that indeed Sirul and Azilah acted on their own!

Is this the man?
The custodian of the dying ember?
The man who generations to come will remember as the last man standing, before the new dawn set in?
OR
Is this the man who is going to set in an even more harsh regime?
To ensure he and his team will have a long run on the nation?
Driven by chauvinism, and detested by the international as well as the domestic society?
Is this the start of a dynasty in the Malaysian Public Life?
Does this mean that we Malaysians are so incapable that we need a select few families to tell us how to live our lives?
Are we so dependent that all aspects of our lives need to be controlled?
Are we so handicapped that we need these political dynasties to teach how to interact with each other?
CAN WE THE MALAYSIAN PEOPLE RISE TO THE OCCASSION WHEN THE NATION NEEDS US?
CAN MALAYSIA DEPEND ON US? 

WHAT IS HAPPENING? NO APPEAL FOR A MURDER CASE  MALAYSIAN PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE REASONS FOR THIS APPARENT DISCRIMINATION. MAYBE, RAZAK BAGINDA IS A CLOSE ASSOCIATE OF THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER, NAJIB TUN RAZAK, WHEREAS RAJA PETRA IS NAJIB’S STRONGEST CRITIC. IF NOT, WHAT ELSE?  PLEASE, DEPUTY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TUN MAJID TUN HAMZAH, CAN YOU EXPLAIN? 

NO APPEAL AGAINST ABDUL RAZAK’S ACQUITTAL

THE CLOCK HAS RUN DOWN ON A POSSIBLE APPEAL AGAINST THE ACQUITTAL OF POLITICAL ANALYST ABDUL RAZAK BAGINDA, WHO HAD BEEN CHARGED WITH ABETTING IN THE MURDER OF MONGOLIAN NATIONAL ALTANTUYA SHAARIIBUU. THE PROSECUTION HAD 14 DAYS TO FILE AN APPEAL AFTER SHAH ALAM HIGH COURT JUDGE MOHD ZAKI MD YASIN DELIVERED HIS RULING ON OCTOBER 31. CHECKS WITH THE COURT REGISTRY AT 5PM TODAY SHOWED THAT NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED. DEPUTY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TUN MAJID TUN HAMZAH(RIGHT) SAID THE COURT HAD MADE A FINDING OF FACT AND HE CONFIRMED THAT THE PROSECUTION WOULD NOT FILE AN APPEAL. “NO FURTHER COMMENTS AS THERE IS AN ON-GOING TRIAL,” HE SAID WHEN CONTACTED MOHD ZAKI IN HIS WRITTEN JUDGMENT HAD SAID: “ONCE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ABETMENT – BY INSTIGATION, BY CONSPIRACY AND BY AIDING – [...] ARE NOT PROVEN ON THE BASIS OF PRIMA FACIEEVIDENCE, ANY OTHER INFERENCES AND DOUBTS THAT MAY HAVE ARISEN MUST BE RESOLVED, AS IS TRITE, IN FAVOUR OF THE ACCUSED PERSON. “IT IS NOT FOR THE COURT TO CALL FOR THE DEFENCE MERELY TO CLEAR OR CLARIFY SUCH DOUBTS [...] I FIND THERE IS NO PRIMA FACIECASE FOR HIM (ABDUL RAZAK, LEFT) TO ANSWER HIS CHARGE…” HOWEVER, THE JUDGE ORDERED SPECIAL ACTION SQUAD POLICE OFFICERS AZILAH HADRI, 32, AND SIRUL AZHAR UMAR, 38, TO ENTER THEIR DEFENCE. THEY ARE JOINTLY ACCUSED OF MURDERING ALTANTUYA, 28, AT A LOCATION BETWEEN LOT 12843 AND LOT 16735 IN MUKIM BUKIT RAJA, SELANGOR BETWEEN 10AM ON OCT 19, 2006 AND 1AM THE FOLLOWING DAY. THEY HAVE ELECTED TO TESTIFY UNDER OATH WHEN THE HEARING RESUMES ON NOV 10. THEIR OTHER OPTIONS WERE EITHER TO GIVE A STATEMENT FROM THE DOCK OR TO REMAIN SILEN