Sabtu, 27 Ogos 2011

BLOG - BLOG PARTI PKR

BLOG - BLOG PARTI PKR


The Spirit of Lubok Kawah/Semangat Lubok Kawah

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 11:30 PM PDT

The Spirit of Lubok Kawah/Semangat Lubok Kawah


DEWAN MESYUARAT UNTUK ORANG ASAL

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 09:09 PM PDT

Saya sangat tertarik dengan ucapan Dato Fauzi Abdul Rahman, Pengerusi Majlis Pimpinan PKR Pahang, semasa merasmikan Himpunan Orang Asal Kuala Krau di Kg Penderas beberapa bulan lalu berhubung dengan perjuangan dan hak Orang Asal di Negeri Pahang.

Setelah membicarakan kedudukan orang Asal dari pelbagai aspek termasuk aspek sosial, ekonomi, kesihatan, pendidikan dan aspek yang ada kaitan dengan adat istiada Orang Asal, Dato Fauzi menekankan perjuangan Orang Asal untuk mencapaikan hak mereka.

Dari segi aspek politik, Dato Fauzi menekankan bahawa hanya Parti Keadilan Rakyat sahaja yang meletakkan didalam Perlembagaannya perjuangan untuk membela dan mempertahankan hak orang Asal.

Secara amalinya Parti Keadilan Rakyat meletakkan Orang Asal didalam pimpinan parti baik diperingkat Pusat, Negeri mahupun Cabang dan beliau melahirkan syukurnya kerana Parti Keadilan Rakyat Cabang Kuala Krau memilih Orang Asal untuk menjadi Naib Ketua parti itu diperingkat Cabang dan beberapa anggota Jawatankuasanya terdiri daripada Orang Asal termasuk juga pimpinan Wanita dan AMK.

Beliau mengucapkan terima kasih kepada PKR Cabang Kuala Krau yang berjaya menubuhkan rantingnya di kesemua 10 buah kampong Orang Asal di Kuala Krau dengan keahliannya meningkat hingga 600 orang.

Dato Fauzi menggariskan tindakan-tindakan yang bakal diambil oleh PKR jika Pakatan Rakyat berjaya memerintah Negeri Pahang.

Tindakan pertama ialah untuk menubuhkan satu Majlis seperti Dewan Undangan Negeri yang terdiri daripada pemimpin-pemimpin Orang Asal dari seluruh Pahang, Majlis itu adalah badan bertindak untuk Orang Asal Negeri Pahang, dibayar elaun oleh Kerajaan Negeri, membincangkan isu-isu yang berkaitan dengan hal ehwal Orang Asal Negeri Pahang.

Rumusan dari perbincangan di Majlis itu akan dibawa ke Mesyuarat Dewan Undangan Negeri Pahang untuk dibentangkan dan untuk diambil tindakan.

Dewan Undangan Negeri Pahang dan Kerajaan Pahang akan mengambil tindakan untuk memperbaiki kedudukan dan status Orang Asal di Negeri Pahang setelah mengambil pandangan keputusan Majlis.

Isu yang paling utama menghantui Orang Asal ialah mengenai tanah mereka, dan Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Negeri Pahang akan mendapatkan pandangan dari Majlis itu sebelum mengambil apa-apa tindakan.

Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Negeri Pahang juga akan melantik wakil-wakil penduduk untuk menjadi pimpinan di peringkat Daerah dengan wakil-wakil itu dibayar elaun, dan wakil-wakil ini membantu Kerajaan mengambil tindakan diperingkat Daerah. Wakil-wakil tersebut diambil dari akar umbi agar mencerminkan kehendak majoriti penduduk Orang Asal.

Cadangan seumpama yang dikemukakan oleh Dato Fauzi itu adalah satu cadangan yang sangat progresif yang tidak pernah dilakukan oleh Barisan UMNO/BN dan meletakkan kedudukan Orang Asal ditempat yang tinggi semata-mata untuk mengatasi masalah yang mereka hadapi selama lebih 50 tahun dibawah pemerintahan UMNO/BN.

Dato Fauzi membayangkan untuk dipinda Perlembagaan Negeri untuk membolehkan perlantikan seorang berdua dari pimpinan Orang Asal menjadi Anggota Dewan Undangan Negeri secara lantikan.

Untuk itu beliau meminta kerjasama daripada Orang Asal untuk memenangkan Pakatan Rakyat didalam Pilihanraya Umum yang akan datang.

DAP MELAYU MAHU BERTANDING DI KAWASAN PKR, UNTUK BUKTIKAN BAHAWA PARTI ITU TIDAK PERKAUMAN!

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 07:43 PM PDT

DAP adalah sebuah parti yang agak established di kawasan pilihanraya didalam bandar dan diantara parti-parti didalam Pakatan Rakyat, DAP lah yang paling berjaya memenangi kawasan-kawasan yang dipertandingkan.

Akhir-akhir ini sudah ada beberapa orang pemimpin DAP berbangsa Melayu yang turut menerajui parti itu, walaupun keanggotaan DAP masih dipenuhi oleh mereka yang bukan Melayu. Pemimpin-pemimpin Melayu didalam DAP ini tidak mempunyai kawasan yang selamat untuk bertanding di kawasan bukan Melayu, dan DAP juga bimbang jika pemimpin-pemimpin Melayu didalam parti itu bertanding di kawasan Cina, calon Melayu itu akan kalah.

Bagaimana pun DAP ingin menunjukkan kepada masyarakat bahawa DAP bukanlah parti perkauman seperti yang tercatit didalam Perlembagaan parti itu. Untuk membuktikan bahawa DAP bukan parti perkauman maka DAP mahu meletakkan beberapa orang calon dari kalangan pemimpin-pemimpin Melayunya untuk bertanding didalam kawasan Melayu. Untuk membuktikan bahawa DAP tidak parti perkauman dengan meletakkan calon Melayu di kawasan Melayu bukanlah cara yang baik untuk tujuan itu. Adalah lebih baik calon Cina dari DAP diletakkan didalam kawasan majoriti Melayu dan calon Melayunya diletakkan didalam kawasan majoriti Cina.

Tuntutan daripada DAP ini sudah lari daripada persepsi asal untuk parti-parti didalam Pakatan Rakyat. Persepsi asalnya ialah parti-parti didalam Pakatan Rakyat berkongsi tenaga, jentera dan pengaruh untuk meletakkan calon-calon yang boleh memberikan kemenangan dan persepsi itu ialah kawasan-kawasan yang dominan Cina ditandingi oleh DAP, dominan Melayu ditandingi oleh PAS dan kawasan-kawasan campuran ditandingi oleh PKR.

Di Sarawak baru-baru ini PKR terpaksa menggalas tanggungjawab untuk mengelakkan BN menang percuma dan dengan itu bertanding juga di kawasan-kawasan pedalaman yang memang sukar untuk dimenangi, sedangkan kawasan-kawasan bandar disapu bersih untuk ditandingi oleh DAP; manakala PAS juga tidak mahu bertanding di kawasan pedalaman, sehingga menimbulkan persepsi bahawa PKR tamak.

Sepatutnya Pakatan Rakyat di Sarawak baru-baru ini ditandingi oleh parti-parti didalam Pakatan Rakyat dengan pembahagian yang lebih lumrah. DAP tidaklah bertanding hanya di kawasan-kawasan Bandar di mana penduduknya mempunyai kefahaman dan kesedaran politik yang lebih tinggi, dan boleh memberikan kemenangan yang mudah.

PKR adalah sebuah parti yang baru tetapi walaupun baru parti itu telah menunjukkan prestasi yang baik dan berpotensi memenangi samada di kawasan bandar atau luar bandar kerana komposisi pimpinan parti itu tidak berpijak hanya kepada satu-satu kaum dan begitu juga keanggotaannya.

PKR boleh bertanding didalam Bandar dan PKR juga boleh dan mampu bertanding di luar bandar dan amat bersesuai didalam kawasan-kawasan campuran.

Sebagai sebuah parti yang bukan sahaja mengikut Perlembagaannya multi-racial, PKR juga adalah sebuah parti pelbagai kaum yang menganggotainya, berbeza sedikit dengan DAP yang juga tidak perkauman tetapi keahliannya dipenuhi oleh orang-orang Cina; dan PAS yang tidak perkauman tetapi ahli-ahlinya dipenuhi oleh orang-orang Melayu.

Tidak ada ironi kepada PKR, keanggotaannya terdiri daripada Orang Melayu, Orang Cina, Orang India, Orang Asal, Orang-Orang Bumiputra Sabah dan Sarawak menjadikan parti itu sebagai "Truly Malaysian".

Bagaimana pun PKR tidak mengambil pendekatan bahawa pemimpin Cinanya hanya bertanding di bandar, atau pemimpin Melayunya hanya bertanding di luar bandar, atau pemimpin Indianya bertanding di kawasan India atau pemimpin Bumiputranya bertanding di kawasan Bumiputra.

PKR adalah sebuah parti multi-racial dan ia boleh meletakkan calon Cinanya di kawasan bercampur yang majoritinya pengundi Melayu, meletakkan mana-mana calonnya didalam kawasan Cina, meletakkan calonnya didalam kawasan Melayu sesuai dengan konsep perjuangan parti itu yang tidak perkauman dan tidak pernah memainkan politik perkauman.

PKR berlandaskan kepada perjuangan rakyat dan bukan perkauman. Maka untuk DAP mahu membuktikan bahawa dia bukan parti perkauman bukanlah dengan cara meletakkan calon Melayunya didalam kawasan majoriti Melayu dan DAP kenalah berkorban agar kawasan-kawasan majoriti Cina yang ditandinginya itu diberikan kepada calon-calon Melayu didalam parti itu dan tidak memainkan sentimen bahawa kawasan Cina hanya layak ditandingi oleh pemimpin-pemimpin Cina nya dan kawasan Melayu hanya layak ditandingi oleh pemimpin-pemimpin Melayu nya.

Pakatan Rakyat sewajarnya sudah menjadi lebih matang, komponen partinya tidaklah tamak mahu mengekalkan kawasan-kawasan yang pernah ditandinginya dengan mengatakan bahawa kawasan-kawasan itu adalah kawasan tradisinya.

Sebagai parti yang baru PKR tidak mempunyai kawasan tradisi, tetapi PKR mempunyai pengaruh diluar spektrum komposisi kaum dan tidak hanya berlandaskan kepada bilangan keanggotaannya bagi satu-satu kawasan. Orang ramai kadang-kadang mahu memilih PKR kerana mereka memandang bahawa parti itu adalah parti jalan tengah bagi mereka.

PAS sebagai parti yang tua didalam Pakatan itu juga tidak boleh mengatakan semua kawasan yang ia bertanding sebagai kawasan tradisinya. Kawasan tradisi membawa erti bahawa kawasan itu adalah kawasan yang ia terus-menerus bertanding dengan memperolehi kemenangan. Jika itu berlaku tiada sesiapa pun lagi mahu mempertikaikan bahawa itu adalah kawasan tradisinya, tetapi jika kawasan itu ditandingi oleh PAS sejak 1955 tetapi tidak pernah menang, maka kawasan seumpama itu bukanlah kawasan tradisi, kawasan itu hanyalah kawasan yang ditandingi oleh PAS sejak tahun 1955, dan tradisinya disitu adalah kalah didalam setiap Pilihanraya.

Parti-parti didalam Pakatan kena akur bahawa jika calon parti itu bertanding beberapa kali didalam Pilihanraya didalam satu-satu kawasan (sekurang-kurangnya 3 kali) dan tidak pernah menang maka kawasan-kawasan itu bolehlah bertukar kepada parti-parti lain didalam Pakatan. Yang penting ialah supaya Pakatan menang bukan parti mana yang bertanding. Maka menjadi sangat tamak kepada parti berkenaan jika calonnya disesuatu kawasan itu kalah dari satu pilihanraya ke satu pilihanraya dalam kawasan yang sama tetapi masih mahu mengekalkan kawasan itu dengan keangkuhan bahawa itu adalah kawasan tradisi. Tradisi kalah bukanlah tradisi yang boleh dikekalkan.

MAKA Parti-Parti didalam Pakatan Rakyat kenalah bersikap lebih bertanggungjawab dan tidak emosi mempertahankan kawasan-kawasan yang pernah ditandinginya jika tidak pernah menang, dan didalam bidang ini contoh dari Barisan Nasional perlu diperhatikan bahawa parti komponen MIC yang kecil dari UMNO dan MCA diberikan kawasan-kawasan yang tidak mempunyai majoriti kaum India.

Bendera Malaysia atau Kuih Raya?

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 03:09 PM PDT

Malaysia menghadapi ujian getir pada tahun ini. Rakyatnya betul-betul berhadapan dengan dilema kerana Hari Raya Aidilfitri jatuh pada hari yang hampir sama dengan Hari Merdeka.

Adakah orang Islam Malaysia akan membuat pilihan samada mahu merayakan Aidilfitri atau Hari Merdeka? Sudah tentu pada 1 Syawal, umat Islam akan menunaikan Solat Sunat Aidilfitri, selepas itu menziarahi kubur, mengadakan majlis tahlil dan menziarahi sanak saudara dan rakan-rakan taulan.

Sudah tentu juga Upacara Menyambut Hari Merdeka akan diadakan di peringkat Pusat, Negeri dan Daerah.

Hanya bezanya adakah rakyat biasa (awam) memilih untuk pergi ke Upacara Menyambut Hari Merdeka atau mereka akan kesibukan merayakan Hari Raya Aidilfitri.

Beberapa minggu ke belakangan ini, saya sempat mengadakan perjalanan ke beberapa buah Negeri di Semenanjung dan banyak Daerah di Negeri Pahang. Dan semalam saya membuat perjalanan ke Kuantan mengikut jalan lama dari Temerloh, dan kembali semula ke Temerloh melalui Highway dan keluar di Tol Chenor untuk pergi ke Bandar Tun Razak (nama baru bagi Bandar Jengka).

Didalam perjalanan ke Kuantan saya tidak terjumpa kenderaan yang memasang bendera Malaysia baik kenderaan persendirian, mahupun kenderaan komersial dan termasuk juga kenderaan Kerajaan.

Tetapi didalam perjalanan dari Kuantan ke Jengka saya terjumpa dengan sebuah lori yang memasang bendera Malaysia di sebelah kanan dan bendera Pahang di sebelah kiri.

Di Bandar Jengka tidak ada sebuah kereta pun yang memasangkan bendera Malaysia. Di Matau, Jengka tidak ada sebuah rumah pun yang memasang bendera Jalur Gemilang.

Tetapi didalam perjalanan dari Tol Chenor ke Bandar Jengka begitu ramai manusia berpusu-pusu di persimpangan Felda Jengka 19, 18, dan seterusnya hingga ke Bandar Jengka kerana disana ada disediakan juadah dan lauk pauk untuk berbuka puasa dan ada pula kuih muih untuk Hari Raya. Gerai ayam panggang penuh dikelilingi oleh pembeli-pembeli dan begitu juga di tempat membakar lemang.

Saya sempat singgah di Simpang Felda Jengka 18, padat betul dengan manusia dan gerai-gerai kerana disana ada pasar Ramadhan yang bertembung dengan pasar malam.

Macam-macam jualan ada dan saya mengambil kesempatan untuk membeli sedikit lauk untuk berbuka puasa.

Disana ramai yang saya kenal, dan sempatlah berborak dengan mereka. Saya kisarkan perbualan saya mengenai sambutan Hari Merdeka.

Kebanyakannya menjawab: "Itu biarlah Menteri-Menteri dan Pegawai-Pegawai Kerajaan saja yang raikan, kita orang bawah ni apa ada hal?"

Kalau beginilah menjadi tanggapan umum, Hari Merdeka sudah tidak ada erti lagi kepada rakyat bawahan, dan persepsi sebegini mestilah diubah segera untuk menjadikan Hari Merdeka itu sebagai hari yang paling penting bagi Negara dan Rakyat Malaysia.

Persepsi ini bukan dibuat-buat. Ia lahir dari perlakuan yang mereka saksikan sendiri bahawa seolah-olahnya Negara ini hanya memberikan faedah dan menfaat kepada hanya pemimpiin-pemimpin politik dari UMNO dan Barisan Nasional.

Kalau begitu kenapakah ahli-ahli UMNO peringkat kampong tidak menyambut Hari Merdeka kalaupun mereka yang menjadi ahli parti-parti Pembangkang dipulaukan dari Majlis-Majlis seumpama itu?

Ini menunjukkan bahawa Pimpinan UMNO tidak lagi boleh ambil "take for granted" terhadap ahli-ahli mereka, walaupun ahli-ahli UMNO itu masih bersedia menyambut Hari Merdeka jika ada imbuhan dan bendera-bendera percuma untuk menghadirkan diri.

Sudah menjadi tradisi kepada ahli-ahli UMNO bahawa jika pemimpin-pemimpin mahukan penyertaan mereka, maka pemimpin-pemimpin mesti menyediakan "pelincir" untuk mereka hadir; duit minyak keretanya, duit makannya, dan duit poketnya. Ini termasuklah juga jemputan oleh pimpinan tertinggi parti itu untuk Majlis Berbuka Puasa. Bas disediakan, duit poket disediakan. Kalau tidak alamatlah Majlis Berbuka Puasa itu dihadiri oleh hanya Pegawai-Pegawai peringkat Daerah serta Ketua-Ketua Kampong dan Ahli JKK.

Semangat juang ahli-ahli UMNO sudah menjadi begitu rendah. "Kenapa tidak," kata mereka, "Yang dapat projek ini dan itu semuanya pemimpin UMNO, kita dapat apa? Kami ni dah jadi ahli Gerakan, Tak Gerak Tak Makan."

Penanaman semangat patriotisme selama lebih 50 tahun dibawah budaya UMNO menjadikan manusia hilang semangat itu. Peranan rasuah dan politik wang yang selama ini ditaburkan oleh UMNO sudah menjadi racun menikam UMNO sendiri. Ahli-ahli mereka hilang semangat juang, hilang semangat patriotisme melainkan ada "pelincir", dan kerosakan ini bukanlah satu kerosakan yang kecil untuk diperbaiki.

Kesemua ini bermula apabila pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO di peringkat Cawangan dan Bahagian berubah wajah. Kalau dulu mereka yang berhempas pulas menegakkan perjuangan dipilih menjadi pemimpin terutama dikalangan guru-guru, tetapi pada hari ini tidak memerlukan pemimpin seumpama itu lagi.

Seseorang kontraktor atau ahli perniagaan yang berjaya dengan mudah merasp masuk menjadi pemimpin UMNO kerana mereka berupaya membeli undi dari perwakilan. Setahun dua ini UMNO sudah mulai mengambil langkap serkap jarang untuk menangkap pemimpin-pemimpin seumpama itu. Tetapi seperti kata ahli-ahli UMNO, "Yang kena tangkap itu tak ramai, yang tak kena tangkap itulah yang menjadi pemimpin dan menjadi Wakil Rakyat, Ahli-Ahli Exco dan Menteri-Menteri."

Ini sudah menjadi satu persepsi umum didalam Parti UMNO, maka bukan mudah persepsi itu hendak ditanggalkan.

Biar pun persepsi itu boleh ditanggalkan di peringkat parti, ahli-ahli UMNO juga memerhatikan perbuatan dan sikap pemimpin-pemimpin mereka yang dengan secara rambang boleh mereka sifatkan sebagai "no money no talk".

Maka didalam keadaan inilah dapat dibuatkan konklusi bahawa Bendera Malaysia tidak akan dapat mengatasi Kuih Raya.

Marilah kita merayakan Hari Raya Aidilfitri mengikut apa yang dituntut oleh Agama kita, dan marilah kita merayakan Hari Merdeka mengikut tuntutan patriotisme kita.



Anwar Ibrahim

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 07:22 PM PDT

Anwar Ibrahim


Sidang Media Pakatan Rakyat

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 02:41 PM PDT

Dimaklumkan bahawa satu sidang media akan diadakan selepas Perbincangan Mejabulat Ekonomi Pakatan Rakyat mengenai Gaji Minimum.

Sidang media ini akan diadakan seperti berikut:

Tarikh : 27 Ogos 2011 (Sabtu)
Masa : 11.30 pagi
Tempat : Bilik Mesyuarat, Bangunan Ibu Pejabat PKR,
Tropicana, Petaling jaya

Antara yang akan menghadiri sidang akhbar ini adalah YB Dato'Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan para Pimpinan Kanan Pakatan Rakyat yang meanggotai Jawatankuasa Bajet Alternatif Pakatan Rakyat.

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

New Investigation Into Film Maker That Took Millions From Malaysia

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 02:37 PM PDT

Independent

Press corps in Kuala Lumpur all knew FBC had close links to the Malaysian government with special access

One of America’s most prestigious magazines, the 154-year-old The Atlantic, has become the latest high-profile news organisation to launch an investigation into its relationship with a media company that was allocated millions of pounds by the Malaysian government.

The Washington-based magazine and website is “reviewing all transactions” it had with FBC, a media company that also produced television programmes for the BBC and the business channel CNBC. The Independent revealed this month that FBC had been hired by Malaysia in a “global strategic communications campaign”.

The FBC programmes broadcast on BBC World News dealt with contentious issues including Malaysia’s treatment of its indigenous peoples, its management of rainforests and its controversial palm-oil industry. The BBC said: “FBC has now admitted to the BBC that it has worked for the Malaysian government. That information was not disclosed to the BBC as we believe it should have been when the BBC contracted programming from FBC. Given this, the BBC has decided to transmit no more programming from FBC while it reviews its relationship with the company.”

The Atlantic has ordered a “full review” into its own relationship with FBC. Justin Smith, president of Atlantic Media Co, publisher of the magazine, has resigned from the board of FBC. FBC’s founder Alan Friedman, a long-term friend of Mr Smith’s, blogged for The Atlantic from this year’s World Economic Forum in Davos. Mr Friedman also encouraged The Atlantic to host an event in March in which the Malaysian Prime Minister, Najib Razak, was interviewed by a correspondent of The Atlantic.

Natalie Raabe, director of communications for The Atlantic, said Mr Smith’s role at FBC was unpaid and “largely nominal”. She said that the magazine was “reviewing all interactions it has had with FBC and its chairman,” including blogs Mr Friedman wrote about Indonesia. “We have found several instances in which Friedman wrote positively about the Indonesian government and its representatives. Our internal process will seek to determine whether Friedman was representing Indonesia at the time he wrote for TheAtlantic.com.”

She said the company was also examining blog comments made by Mr Friedman on Malaysia and had now attached an online reference to inform readers that he was working for the Malaysian government “at or around the time he wrote them”.

FBC also made a half-hourly weekly programme for CNBC, part of the American NBC network. Many of its episodes featured Malaysia. CNBC has withdrawn the programme “indefinitely” and “immediately initiated an examination of FBC and its business practices”. Since publication of The Independent’s investigation, the newspaper has been contacted by numerous correspondents based in Kuala Lumpur, who complained that the broadcasters should have taken action earlier.

One senior international journalist with a decade of experience in Malaysia, said FBC’s relationship with the Malaysian government was “common knowledge among the press corps in KL”. He said: “The real scandal is the failure by BBC and CNBC to police the outsourcing of their programmes. They need to answer some hard questions.”

The BBC said it had “acted swiftly to suspend the broadcasting from FBC” and pointed out that “all independent TV companies who produce programmes for BBC World News have to sign strict agreements”.

A former correspondent for a prominent US magazine said that correspondents became accustomed to seeing FBC granted access to “notoriously press-shy” senior political and business figures who would not speak to other sections of the media. “Knowing FBC and their modus operandi, it was pretty clear how it happened,” he said. The Independent has established that FBC also hired the Washington-based American lobbying company APCO Worldwide for the purpose of “raising awareness of the importance of policies in Malaysia that are pro-business and pro-investment as well as the significance of reform and anti-terrorism efforts in that country”.

FBC denies impropriety in any of its programme-making. Its lawyers said in a letter that “at no time have the television programmes made for the BBC ever been influenced or affected by our client’s commercial activities”. It said that FBC ran production and commercial divisions, which “are and always have been quite separate and distinct”. The BBC, CNBC and the media regulator Ofcom continue to investigate.

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

KEADILAN Fully Supports YB Fuziah Salleh And The Anty-LYNAS Movement

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 05:17 AM PDT

BN's ploy of using the UMNO-owned TV3 to discredit YB Fuziah Salleh,KEADILAN Vice President and Kuantan MP's relentless campaign together with the Anti-Lynas movement against the Lynas Advanced Material Plant (LAMP) in Gebeng, Kuantan is utterly desperate and despicable.

BN resorted to hide behind two nuclear experts that misrepresented the aims and objectives of the Anti-Lynas movement in order to further BN's narrow and divisive political objectives.

Zulkefly Mohd Omar, the PAS Central Committee Member and Chairman of Environment Bureau has also released a statement in support of the Anti-Lynas movement which is supported by Pakatan Rakyat as a coalition.

In addition, the Malaysian Medical Association, the Malaysian Bar Council, Sahabat Alam Malaysia, Aliran and the Consumer Association of Penang, among others, have expressed their concern about the project.

The Anti-Lynas movement was never narrowly confined to objecting about radioactivity alone. On the contrary, the movement opposed LAMP on the basis that operating a rare earth refinery in Prime Minister Najib Razak's home state brings with it other hazards such as health and environmental damage that would have dire consequences for the tourism and fishing industry, thus the local economy as a whole.

LAMP will be the world's largest rare earth plant outside China once it operates. We believe that the health and safety of the residents of Gebeng and the surrounding areas are too precious to be sacrificed for short-term economic benefit. In this regard, YB Fuziah has rightly defended the rights of Gebeng residents, and should be applauded for continuing to do so as a responsible Member of Parliament for Kuantan.

Nurul Izzah Anwar
Vice President
Parti Keadilan Rakyat

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

‘Pristine Condition’ Of Rectal Swabs Puzzles Expert

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 02:25 AM PDT

Malaysiakini

How is it that three cotton swabs retrieved from the rectum of sodomy complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan showed no sign of degradation when tested some 100 hours later?

This is the issue that is puzzling Australian DNA expert Dr Brian McDonald.

dr brian mcdonald sodomy llDescribing the findings from the three swabs marked B7, B8 and B9 from the high and low rectal areas of the complainant as “pristine”, McDonald (right) told the Sodomy II trial of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim that this was “inconsistent with the history”.

“This is because there is no sign of degradation and the samples are pristine,” he said about the three samples taken from Saiful’s rectum 56 hours after the alleged sodomy took place between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.

Saiful was examined by four doctors at Hospital Kuala Lumpur between 9pm on June 28 and midnight on June 29, 2008.

Investigating officer Supt Jude Blacious Pereira had earlier testified that the samples were kept in a drawer in his air-conditioned office and handed over to chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong at around 7pm on June 30, 2008.

Yesterday, McDonald, 60, told the Kuala Lumpur High Court that the samples should ideally be kept in a freezer at minus 20 degrees Celsius.

Questioned on the three samples by defence counsel Ram Karpal Singh, McDonald said the ‘Male Y’ DNA was prevalent in the low rectal swabs.

However, the witness noted, Saiful’s DNA was prevalent in the high rectal swab.

“Hence, I cannot discount the possibility that Saiful’s semen or sperm could have been up in the high rectal area, based on the tests,” McDonald said.

“Furthermore,” he added, “the three samples from the swab are pristine, although they should have degraded under the circumstances.”

Another Australian expert witness, Dr David Wells, had testified earlier that he would not take samples from a sexual assault victim 36 hours after the attack.

McDonald had also testified that such a sample would be deeply degraded after 56 hours.

Saiful’s semen sperm in anus?

McDonald also explained that chemists Dr Seah Lay Hong was guilty of "guessing" in treating Saiful’s sample, as there was no indication in her report where the sample originates and that he did not use the same numbering system employed by the doctors.

NONE"We have to assume where the swab came from as this is not reflected in Seah’s (right) report," he said, adding Seah should verify where it came from in sodomy cases.

"It could come from a cigarette butt. Seah did not provide the information in the report. She has not reported anything on the sample whether it came somewhere or another."

McDonald said Seah did not properly do the differential extraction process (DEP) test from the samples taken to resolve the issue of sperm and non-sperm cells.

This, he said, has to be done again and again until what is left are sperm and not other contaminants.

He said this has resulted in findings of Saiful’s DNA in the rectum.

"That is the case of the complainant’s semen is in his rectum," he said, adding one cannot assume there is Saiful’s sperm is in his own rectum initially but this had to be assumed following the results of the test.

"I would say Seah’s evidence is a guess."

Ram: Why is that?

McDonald: Because she did not slide on the receptacle and put it under a microscope to verify. That is only way to determine and if there is further, the process has to be repeated again to remove the contaminants.

Ram: Is it possible that there is Saiful’s sperm in his anus.

McDonald: If she had done it properly, we can cut out on such a possibility. The sample taken cannot be relied on because (it contain Saiful’s DNA).

Ram: Can we conclusively say that Saiful’s sperm is not in his anus?

McDonald: No, she is guessing that there are other cells. She did not do the DEP test properly. The Male Y (allegedly Anwar’s DNA) is predominant in B7 the low rectal swab. However, on the B8 (high rectal), Saiful’s DNA was predominant.We cannot discount Saiful’s sperm was up in his own anus, based on the result.

Anwar Ibrahim is charged with sodomising Saiful at the Desa Damansara condominium between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.

The trial continues from Sept 19 to 23 with McDonald’s testimony.

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Anwar Difitnah Dan Bukan Pemecah Belah Perpaduan Melayu – Islam

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 02:10 AM PDT

Kenyataan Media

Parti Keadilan Rakyat mengalu-alukan kenyataan Mufti Perak Tan Sri Harussani Zakaria di media massa bahawa punca perpecahan Melayu-Islam adalah kerana Kerajaan yang lemah, tidak amanah dan rasuah. Beliau juga menyatakan bahawa demi menjaga perpaduan Melayu, pernah menasihati Dr Mahathir agar tidak memecat Timbalanya ketika itu iaitu Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim serta membuat tuduhan liwat tanpa membawa empat orang saksi.

Dengan kenyataan di atas, jelaslah bahawa apa yang ditanggapi sebagai perpecahan Melayu-Islam pada masa kini adalah berpunca dari permainan politik kotor para pemimpin UMNO sendiri bermula dari Dr. Mahathir Mohammad (Mantan Presiden UMNO dan Perdana Menteri Malaysia). Kenyataan ini juga menjelaskan dengan terang bahawa perpecahan orang Melayu pada masa kini bukan di sebabkan oleh Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan Pakatan Rakyat seperti yang digembar-gemburkan selama ini.

Kenyataan Mufti Perak tersebut juga mengesahkan pendirian kita selama ini bahawa tuduhan liwat ke atas Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim adalah tidak sah dan fitnah semata-mata untuk menjatuhkan beliau sebagai pemimpin politik harapan orang Melayu-Islam. Adalah jelas bahawa pemecatan Anwar bukan kerana faktor moral tetapi konspirasi jahat Dr Mahathir Muhammad dan para kuncunya.

Dengan pendedahan yang dibuat ini, rakyat perlulah membuka mata dan menyatakan sikap menolak dengan tegas fitnah yang dilemparkan ke atas Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Malah, semua yang cintakan keadilan perlulah bersama-sama bertanggungjawab dan bertindak untuk membela beliau dari segala kezaliman dan pembohongan berterusan sejak lebih satu dekad yang lalu.

Justeru, bersempena dengan hari-hari terakhir bulan Ramadan yang mulia dan padanya diturunkan kitab suci al Qur'an, kita menyeru para pemimpin UMNO supaya melakukan muhasabah diri dan menghentikan kezaliman ke atas DSAI demi perpaduan ummah dan seluruh masyarakat Malaysia amnya. Kita berkeyakinan penuh bahawa selagi kezaliman terhadap DSAI tidak dihentikan, isu perpaduan Melayu-Islam tidak akan dapat diselesaikan secara tuntas.

Dr Muhammad Nur Manuty
Ketua Penerangan

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Wee Choo Keong

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 03:24 PM PDT

Wee Choo Keong


Khazanah: “MAS-AirAsia share swap a case of “BINA” first and “FIKIR” later?

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 09:13 PM PDT

I would like to share the comment below with all the readers with regards to this so-called  “MAS-AirAisa share swap”, which was shrouded with secrecy. Khazanah Nasional Berhad is still thinking about buying the 10% share in AirAsia X Sdn Bhd. Khazanah has appointed Morgan Stanley Investment Banker to do a valuation on AirAsia X [...]

Anak Muda Kampung Nak Senang

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 11:26 AM PDT

Anak Muda Kampung Nak Senang


TV3, Surau untuk orang Kafir, Surau Al-Musyrikin

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 06:48 PM PDT



Dari Blog Milosuam - TV3 Kantoi! Surau Al-Musyrikin tidak wujud! SEBELUM ini media propaganda, TV3 ada menyiarkan berita kononnya ada sebuah kelas tuisyen di Jalan Klang lama yang menyebarkan agama Kristian kepada pelajarnya.

Tambah melucukan bercampur hairan, TV3 mendakwa sekumpulan QARIAH SURAU AL-MUSYRIKIN (kafir) telah berhimpun di hadapan kelas tuisyen berkenaan kerana membantah tindakan kelas tuisyen itu yang didakwa kononnya menyebarkan agama Kristian kepada pelajar yang beragama Islam.

Saksikan video laporan media propaganda TV3 di http://milosuam.blogspot.com/2011/08/tv3-kantoi-surau-al-musyrikin-tidak.html#ixzz1W5ezee5M

Oleh kerana tidak berpuas hati dengan laporan pelik dan melucukan dari TV3 ini, ReJaM© telah mengambil keputusan untuk menyiasat sendiri kebenarannya.

Selepas kira-kira setengah hari mencari, ReJaM© berjaya menemukan kelas tuisyen yang dilaporkan. Kelas tuisyen itu terletak di sebuah kawasan setinggan yang didiami oleh majoriti kaum Cina dan India serta pendatang asing termasuk warga Indonesia.

Di sebelah kelas tuisyen itu, tinggal seorang warga asing yang sudah mendapat taraf penduduk tetap. Beliau mendakwa tiada satu pun surau di kawasan tersebut, kerana ia merupakan kawasan yang didiami oleh Cina dan India. Malah masjid juga terletak jauh dari penempatan itu.

Di bawah ini rakaman perbualan yang sempat dirakamkan.

Lihat dengan mata kepala anda sendiri bagaimana TV3 tanpa rasa bersalah mencipta nama surau yang tidak wujud iaitu SURAU AL-MUSYRIKIN.

Sifirnya mudah, Jalan Klang Lama terletak di bawah Parlimen Seputeh, YB Teresa Kok. Maka TV3 mahu rakyat percaya bahawa Teresa Kok cuba menyebarkan Kristian di kawasannya.

Sila gunakan akal anda sendiri, masuk akal atau tidak pelajar yang beragama Islam pergi ke kelas tuisyen di kawasan setinggan yang didiami oleh Cina, India dan warga asing untuk mempelajari agama Kristian?

Mana-mana ibu bapa beragama Islam yang menghantar anak mereka ke kelas tuisyen Kristian memang nak mampos! Kelas tuisyen itu sudah wujud di situ bertahun-tahun untuk anak orang-orang Cina dan India setempat yang beragama Kristian.

Polis tendang perut ibu tunggal dalam serbuan

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 05:43 PM PDT



Ibu tunggal mendakwa diserbu lelaki bersenjata


RANTAU PANJANG, 25 Ogos 2011 : Seorang armalah bagaikan bermimpi apabila rumahnya di sini tiba-tiba diserbu sekumpulan lelaki bersenjata kira-kira jam 8.30 pagi semalam. Pintu rumahnya ditendang kumpulan lelaki terbabit yang datang tanpa diundang. Lebih parah lagi dakwa Noraisiah Che Ghani, 40 salah seorang lelaki bertopeng lengkap bersenjata itu menendang di bahagian perutnya sehingga terduduk.

"Kesannya saya mengalami sakit di bahagian pinggang dan perut sehingga sekarang. Ketika kejadian saya sedang tidur di ruang tamu tiba-tiba terperanjat mendengar bunyi kenderaan yang kuat di halaman rumah.

"Sebaik sahaja bangun dua anggota polis bertopeng menendang pintu rumah dan tendangan terkena perut sehingga saya terduduk.

"Sampai hari ini saya tidak boleh duduk lama kerana sakit di bahagian pinggang dan perut," ujarnya berniaga sayur di Pasar Rantau Panjang.

Armalah kepada tiga anak yang berusia antara sembilan dan setahun setengah itu pada mulanya panik tidak tahu apa punca kedatangan lelaki bertopeng lengkap bersenjata.

Ujar beliau tanpa memberitahu apa sebab kedatangan mereka terus bertindak.

"Selepas lama mengeledah kemudian salah seorang anggota polis terbabit memohon maaf di atas kesilapan mereka, lalu meninggalkan rumah saya.

"Seorang anggota polis pada awalnya mendakwa kononnya saya terlibat menyeludup senjata api," katanya yang masih tidak dapat melupakan peristiwa berkenaan ketika ditemui di rumahnya hari ini.

Ketika kejadian turut berada di rumahnya tiga anaknya, emak yang cacat penglihatan, dua adik beradiknya.

Kumpulan bersenjata itu menyelongkar segenap ruang di dalam rumahnya hampir dua jam sebelum beredar tanpa menemui sebarang barangan disyaki.

Mencerita lanjut saat-saat mencemas itu Noraisiah memberitahu beliau kemudian ditawarkan sejumlah bayaran sebagai kos perubatan bagi menutup kes tersebut ketika datang membuat laporan polis di Balai Polis Rantau Panjang.

Menurut beliau adiknya Numi Che Ghani juga turut ditawarkan sejumlah bayaran yang sama.

Serbuan itu juga turut menjadikan adik iparnya Sopian Sautar, 31 sebagai mangsa apabila dipaksa meminum air empat botol kerana disyaki penagih dadah ketika datang menemankan Norasiah di Balai Polis.

"Pada mulanya saya enggan sebab saya berpuasa, tetapi saya dipaksa juga minum empat botol air kosong dalam botol besar selepas ujian kali pertama didapati saya negatif sebarang dadah," ujarnya.

Menurut Norasiah selepas kejadian kira-kira jam 11 pagi beliau ke klinik berhampiran rumahnya untuk mendapatkan rawatan dan kira-kira 11 malam pula membuat laporan polis.

Sementara itu anggota Parlimen Rantau Panjang, Siti Zailah Mohd Yusof berharap kerajaan dan pihak polis bertanggungjawab ke atas mangsa yang ditendang sekumpulan lelaki bersenjata alasan disyaki sebagai penyeludup senjata.

"Kita minta kerajaan dan pasukan polis bertanggungjawab terhadap apa yang berlaku. Mereka juga meninggalkan mangsa begitu sahaja tanpa membantunya membawa ke hospital biar pun tercedera," katanya ketika menziarahi mangsa di rumahnya di sini.

Siti Zailah yang juga Ketua Dewan Muslimat PAS Pusat turut melahirkan rasa hairan apabila salinan laporan polis yang diterima mangsa tidak sama dengan apa yang dilapor semalam.

"Dalam laporan itu, mangsa memberitahu anggota polis yang bertopeng menyerbu rumahnya dengan diacu senjata seramai hampir 20 orang, tetapi dalam laporan yang diberi kepada pengadu hanya dua orang sahaja," katanya.


http://bm.harakahdaily.net/index.php/berita-utama/5114-ibu-tunggal-mendakwa-diserbu-lelaki-bersenjata

s

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 09:29 AM PDT

s


Sumbangan Kasih Eidul Fitri

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 08:14 PM PDT

Tarikh : 21 Ramadhan 1432H/21 Ogos 2011
Tempat : Masjid Jamek Kg.Nakhoda, Batu Caves
Masa : 5 petang - 8 malam





















Qiamulail Perdana di Masjid Jamek Kg.Nakhoda

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 07:58 PM PDT










Pelajar Terharu Terima Sumbangan Adun Batu Caves Sempena Kasih Eidul Fitri

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 07:48 PM PDT


Batu Caves : Bahang menyambut ketibaan Aidilfitri semakin terasa oleh semua umat islam. Dalam membuat persiapan tidak ketinggalan juga bantuan diberikan kepada golongan anak yatim piatu, ibu tunggal, fakir miskin dan OKU. Seramai 300 penerima sumbangan Kasih Aidilfitri telah disampaikan oleh Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (ADUN) Batu Caves, Amiruddin Shari dan Ahli Parlimen Gombak Azmin Ali tanpa mengira parti di Masjid Jamek Kg. Nakhoda Batu Caves Baru-baru ini. Azmin Ali berkata, "sumbangan ini diberikan kepada golongan yang telah di pilih oleh ADUN Batu Caves bagi memastikan golongan tersebut mendapat bantuan untuk membuat persiapan Aidilfitri yang bakal menjelang tidak lama lagi. Kita harap dengan bantuan diberikan dapat mengurang bebanan semua penerima". "Kita ingin pastikan semua umat islam menyambut Aidilfitri tahun ini penuh kesyukuran dan kegembiran setelah Berjaya mengerjakan amal ibadah puasa selama sebulan yang merupakan rukun islam yang ketiga". "Sumbangan yang diberikan dengan mendapat kerjasama daripada Ahli Parlimen Gombak, Pusat Khidmat Masyarakat (PKM) DUN Batu Caves dan sumbangan daripada pihak tertentu dengan meminta pihak kami sampaikan bayaran zakat ini kepada golongan asnaf.
Alhamdulilah pada hari ini kita telah sempurnakan hasrat mereka dengan memberi bantuan kewangan dan barangan dapur. Kita juga mengadakan majlis berbuka puasa bersama semua penerima", katanya. Adik Noor Fikri Md Omar, 15thn merupakan anak yatim telah kehilangan bapanya. Beliau merupakan pelajar daripada Sekolah Menengah Sungai Kertas melahirkan rasa terharu kerana masih ada insan yang sudi menghulurkan bantuan kepada dirinya. Menurutnya walaupun Hari Raya Adilfitri semakin hampir, dirinya dan keluarga tidak menerima sebarang bantuan daripada pihak berwajib melainkan menerima bantuan daripada ADUN Batu Caves dan Ahli Parlimen Gombak. Ibunya walaupun bekerja tetapi pendapatannya tidak mengcukupi untuk membuat persiapan Adilfitri memandangkan masih ada tiga beradik lagi yang bersekolah dan dirinya juga akan bakal menghadapai peperiksaan Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) tahun ini. Fikri berkata, "Ibu juga bekerja keras untuk membiayai pelajaran kami. Yuran peperiksaan perlu dijelaskan. Alhamdulilah dengan sumbangan diberikan oleh ADUN dan Ahli Parlimen ini akan digunakan untuk bayaran peperiksaan dan sebahagiannya akan diberikan pada ibu untuk buat persiapan Hari Raya". Tengku Rohani Bt Tengku Mohamed, 46 thn, "Terima kasih kepada ADUN Batu caves dan Ahli Parlimen Gombak yang telah memberi bantuan kepada saya yang tidak menerima bantuan daripada mana-mana pihak". "Saya mengalami keretakan tulang belakang semenjak setahun yang lalu dan tidak boleh bekerja lagi. Dengan bantuan diberikan sekurang-kurangnya dapat membuat persediaan Hari Raya, katanya". Editor : Khaulah Azwar

Angkatan Muda Keadilan Bagan Datoh,Perak Darul Ridzuan

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 07:38 AM PDT

Angkatan Muda Keadilan Bagan Datoh,Perak Darul Ridzuan


SALAM AIDILFITRI...

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 06:21 PM PDT


SELURUH WARGA AMK BAGAN DATOH MENGUCAPKAN SELAMAT HARI RAYA AIDILFITRI KHUSUS UNTUK WARGA BAGAN DATOH DAN UMUMNYA UNTUK RAKYAT MALAYSIA. BERHATI2 MEMANDU DIJALAN RAYA KERANA NAJIB CAKAP HIGHWAY MALAYSIA DH JADI KUBUR TAK BERTANDA.

Anwar berjaya menjerat musuhnya

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 06:19 PM PDT

Ramai juga yang minta komen saya tentang pendirian Anwar memilih untuk membela dirinya melalui keterangan tidak bersumpah. Saya rasa elok juga saya berkongsi pendapat mengenai pendirian Anwar tersebut.

Saya akui awalnya saya juga agak terkejut dengan pendirian Anwar tersebut. Namun setelah mengikuti keterangannya tersebut saya harus akui bahawa tindakan Anwar amat amat bijak. Saya percaya pendirian itu dibuat dengan perkiraan yang mendalam dengan mengambil kira sejak awal lagi perbicaraan Anwar dilihat melanggar norma-norma atau piawaian perbicaraan yang adil . Memberi keterangan dengan tidak bersumpah sudah tentu merupakan opsyen yang terbaik untuk Anwar dalam kondisi sebegitu.

Musuh Anwar memulakan serangan di atas pendirian Anwar tersebut . Dengan nada sinis mereka memperli kononnya Anwar takut untuk disoal balas oleh pendakwaraya. Musuh beliau menyatakan Saiful lebih berani dari Anwar kerana beliau memberikan keterangan dengan bersumpah dan rela disoal balas oleh Karpal Singh. Ya, ia satu hujah yang menarik tapi malangnya hujah tersebut bertolak dari qiyas atau analogi yang tidak betul atau dalam bahasa arabnya dipanggil qiyas ma'al fariq. Mengapa?


Isu Saiful berani memberi keterangan bersumpah tidak timbul kerana sebagai saksi pendakwa , undang-undang mewajibkan beliau memberi keterangan bersumpah. Makna mudahnya Saiful tidak ada pilihan kecuali wajib memberi keterangan bersumpah. Terpaksa memberi keterangan secara bersumpah bukan indikator keberanian seseorang.

Kedudukan Anwar sebagai pihak yang dituduh berbeza dengan kedudukan Saiful. Tidak seperti Saiful undang-undang memberi Anwar tiga pilihan yang sah untuk membela diri iaitu sama ada memberi keterangan dengan sumpah ( yang boleh disoal balas ) atau memberi keterangan dengan tidak bersumpah ( yang tidak boleh disoal balas ) atau hanya berdiam diri. Hatta jika Anwar memilih untuk berdiam diri hakim tidak boleh secara automatik membuat kesimpulan bahawa Anwar bersalah kerana seorang hakim masih perlu meneliti semula keterangan pendakwa sebelum membuat keputusan.

Musuh Anwar juga berhujah bukankah keterangan bersumpah lebih kuat nilainya dan jika Anwar benar-benar tidak bersalah kenapa beliau takut untuk memberi keterangan bersumpah dan boleh disoal balas oleh pendakwa.

Sekali lagi ia hujah yang menarik tetapi malangnya hujah tersebut gagal melihat keseluruhan proses perbicaraan Anwar . Melihat pendirian Anwar yang memilih untuk memberi keterangan tidak bersumpah secara terpisah dengan keseluruhan proses perbicaraan Anwar bukan sahaja tidak wajar malahan secara jelas ia satu hujah yang dangkal.

Hakikatnya bagi saya kerana kepercayaan bahawa dirinya tidak bersalah mendorong Anwar mengambil pendirian tersebut. Mana-mana tertuduh yang tidak bersalah dengan mudah dijatuhkan hukuman bersalah dalam perbicaraan yang tidak adil.

Jika perbicaaraan Anwar memang dari awal mengikut piawaian perbicaraan yang adil hujah musuh Anwar itu mungkin ada keabsahannya. Namun dengan pelbagai perkara pelik dan tidak masuk akal berlaku dalam kes Anwar pendirian Anwar bukan sahaja wajar malahan amat tepat. Mari kita ambil satu contoh kepelikan dari siri-siri kepelikan yang berlaku dalam kes Anwar iaitu isu tawaran saksi saksi pendakwa kepada pasukan peguambela Anwar.

Bukankah pendakwa raya telah menawarkan kepada pihak peguambela Anwar beberapa orang saksi mereka seperti Najib , Rosmah, Musa Hassan dan beberapa orang lain. Berdasarkan prinsip undang-undang jenayah dan piawaian perbicaraan yang adil saksi-saksi pendakwa ini sewajarnya bersedia dipanggil oleh pihak pembela dan mereka juga wajar menjawab soalan-soalan peguambela apabila dipanggil untuk temubual.

Peliknya dalam kes Anwar ini saksi saksi yang ditawar oleh pendakwa ini boleh memilih untuk tidak ingin menjadi saksi pihak pembela dan tidak mahu menjawab soalan-soalan peguambela Anwar semasa sessi temubual.

Tindakan pelik saksi saksi ini malangnya timbul dari keputusan pelik Hakim yang menyatakan bahawa saksi saksi seperti Najib dan Rosmah ini boleh memilih untuk tidak menjawab soalan-soalan peguambela Anwar.
.
Keputusan Hakim tersebut menyebabkan tawaran saksi- saksi pendakwa seperti Najib dan Rosmah kepada pasukan peguambela Anwar tidak ada apa apa nilai dan hanya sia-sia dan membuang masa. Apa gunanya pendakwaraya menawar saksi-saksi mereka yang enggan bersuara dan apa gunanya pula untuk peguambela Anwar memanggil saksi-saksi yang enggan bersuara ( baca kecut untuk bersuara ).

Hakikatnya bukan Anwar yang tidak berani memberi keterangan bersumpah sebaliknya Najib, Rosmah , Musa Hassan dan Rodwan yang takut untuk memberi keterangan sama ada secara tidak bersumpah di luar mahkamah iaitu dalam sessi temubual atau secara bersumpah di dalam kandang saksi di mahkamah. Malangnnya musuh Anwar tidak nampak ironi ini. Mereka tidak habis habis 'menyalak' supaya perbicaraan disegerakan sedangkan tindakan Najib, Rosmah, Musa Hasan dan Rodwan ini antara penyumbang besar kepada kelengahan perbicaraan
.
Seperkara lagi Anwar sudah punya pengalaman memberi keterangan bersumpah sebanyak dua kali sebelum ini dan beliau amat arif permainan kotor musuhnya. Memberi keterangan bersumpah akan dikawal oleh mantra 'tidak relevan' yang akan kita dengar berulang-ulang kali seperti dua perbicaraan beliau yang terdahulu. Bayangkan jika keluar dari mulut Anwar misalnya 'ada konspirasi nak aibkan saya...tidak relevan..' macam mana TV3 boleh ada siri khas tentang Saiful' ..tidak relevan.. begitulah yang saya percaya ada di dalam pemikiran Anwar.

Memberi keterangan secara tidak bersumpah tidak boleh dikawal oleh mantra 'tidak relevan'. Anwar bebas menentukan rentak dan iramanya tanpa diganggu gendang 'tidak relevan'. Hakikatnya apa yag Anwar katakan tersebut itulah yang paling ditakuti oleh musuh-musuhnya .

Malang sungguh musuh Anwar kerana penantian mereka bahawa Anwar akan terperangkap dalam jerat mereka tidak berlaku. Yang berlaku adalah Anwar yang kini menjerat mereka dan sehingga artikel ini ditulis seluruh manusia di seantero alam kini mula menghakimi sistem kehakiman negara ini dan para aktor -aktor yang terlibat dalam perbicaraan Anwar.

Syabas Anwar !

Oleh : Mohamed Hanipa Maidin

PERKASA Dah Jadi PERKASAM.. Goyang Macam Lalang

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 06:18 PM PDT

KUALA LUMPUR, 26 Ogos ─ Perkasa bersetuju dengan pendirian Mufti Perak Tan Sri Harussani Zakaria bahawa perpecahan di kalangan orang Melayu wujud disebabkan pentadbiran negara yang cukup lemah, rasuah dan tidak amanah.

Bagaimanapun Setiausaha Agungnya Syed Hassan Syed Ali menegaskan, perpecahan orang Melayu tidak berlaku, sebaliknya yang berpecah adalah pemimpin-pemimpin kaum itu.

Jelas beliau, perpecahan antara pemimpin Melayu itu berlaku disebabkan sikap mereka yang gemar menyalahkan antara satu sama lain selain turut menyebarkan fitnah.


"Saya fikir Melayu tidak berpecah sebenarnya, yang berpecah sebenarnya pemimpin-pemimpin Melayu... fitnah-memfintah antara pemimpin Melayu lebih jelas puncanya dari rasuah penyebab Melayu berpecah.

"Fitnah secara terang-terangan dapat jelas dibaca atau didengar di mana-mana saluran media atau ceramah. Kekayaan dan kuasa yang dikejar oleh pemimpin Melayu punca fitnah-memfitnah berlaku," katanya.

Menurut Syed Hassan, Pakatan Rakyat juga tidak boleh memberi jaminan bahawa parti perikatan itu mampu membendung gejala rasuah yang turut melibatkan pegawai-pegawai kerajaan.

"Tapi tidak jamin rasuah tiada, rasuah sudah jadi budaya masyarakat Malaysia termasuk orang Islam sendiri, pegawai jabatan agama pun ada ditangkap kerana rasuah.

"Akhir sekali rasuah bukan hanya di kalangan pemimpin politik, yang lebih besar terlibat dengan rasuah adalah mereka yang diamanahkan melaksanakan tugas-tugas menjayakan dasar kerajaan dan negara," katanya.

Jelas beliau, gejala tidak sihat dalam kalangan pegawai kerajaan boleh di atasi sekiranya agensi agama menyusun strategi untuk mencegah perkara itu.

"Jadi, jabatan agama Islam besar tugas mereka untuk menyusun strategi bagi memberi ceramah yang lebih berkesan isu fitnah dan rasuah.

"Di jabatan-jabatan kerajaan adakan siaran radio dalaman yang didengari oleh semua kakitangan yang sedang bekerja boleh mendengar sambil buat kerja, ceramah melalui kaset atau CD dari ulama-ulama yang tiada kepentingan politik untuk tajuk khas fitnah dan rasuah sekali pagi dan petang. Ini membolehkan mereka tidak mudah terpengaruh dengan mengikut nafsu jahat," katanya kepada The Malaysian Insider.

Dalam Wacana Ulama Politik Untuk Dakwah Atau Parti kelmarin, Harussani berkata, perpecahan di kalangan Melayu berlaku disebabkan pentadbiran negara yang cukup lemah, rasuah dan tidak amanah.

Harussani juga berkata, orang Melayu berpecah selepas bekas perdana menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad memecat Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim pada September 1998.

Bagaimanapun beberapa blog pro-Najib dan mesej-mesej menerusi Twitter mempersoalkan kenyataan terbuka beliau.

Syed Hassan menambah kedudukan orang Melayu akan lebih terancam sekiranya Pakatan Rakyat memerintah.

Jelas beliau, orang Melayu bukan sahaja akan berpecah malah akan menjadi "minoriti dan pupus" jika negara dipimpin parti perikatan itu.

"Ada kebenaran kata Tan Sri Harussani itu.Tapi jika Pakatan memerintah bukan setakat Melayu berpecah malah boleh jadi bangsa Melayu menjadi minoriti dan akan pupus satu hari nanti bersama-sama pemimpin Melayu semua.

"Jika Melayu bersatu, juga jangan fikir tidak akan ada rasuah... pembangunan Islam dan Melayu lebih terjamin jika Melayu bersatu," katanya.

The Spirit of Lubok Kawah/Semangat Lubok Kawah

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 12:23 AM PDT

The Spirit of Lubok Kawah/Semangat Lubok Kawah


Wang MPOB kurang RM50.00 - laporan SPRM akan dibuat

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 10:14 AM PDT

Peneroka-peneroka Felda dari beberapa buah rancangan Felda di Rompin tidak berpuas hati kerana bayaran Insentif Tanam Semula Sawit dari MPOB sejumlah RM4000.00 bagi setiap peneroka yang dibayar kepada peneroka-peneroka didapati dipotong oleh pihak tertentu tetapi tanpa penyata potongan rasmi.

Setiap peneroka telah dipotong sebanyak RM50.00 seorang. Peneroka-peneroka Felda Keratong 7 memberitahu Lubokkawah.Blogspot.com bahawa mereka percaya pemotongan ini dibuat oleh sindiket dari kalangan pengurusan JKKR.

Mereka akan memberi tempoh hingga hari esuk, 26hb Ogos 2011 supaya wang potongan RM50.00 itu dikembalikan kepada mereka, dan jika pihak berkenaan enggan atau engkar berbuat demikian, mereka akan beramai-ramai membuat laporan kepada Polis dan SPRM.

Peneroka-peneroka di Felda Keratong 6 tidak dipotong bayaran dari MPOB ini kerana peneroka-peneroka disana telah memberitahu Felda dan JKKR diperingkat rancangan mereka bahawa jika bayaran itu dipotong mereka akan membuat laporan Polis dan mengadu kepada SPRM.

Peneroka-peneroka di Gugusan Keratong dan Selancar yang mendapati bayaran daripada MPOB ini dipotong adalah perbuatan khianat daripada pihak tertentu di rancangan masing-masing dan bukan dari MPOB.

Di Keratong 7 sahaja terdapat seramai lebih 400 peneroka Felda dan jika setiap peneroka dipotong RM50.00 bererti sindikit ini telah memperdayakan lebih dari RM20,000.00 dan potongan ini tidak diizinkan oleh peneroka-peneroka berkenaan.

Anwar Ibrahim

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 07:51 PM PDT

Anwar Ibrahim


Sampel DNA Tidak Diuji Dengan Betul- Pakar

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 07:34 PM PDT

Keadilan Daily

9.15 pagi: Perbicaraan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim di Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur bermula dengan pakar DNA, Dr Brian Mc Donalds masuk ke kandang saksi untuk  menyambung memberi keterangan.

Ahli kimia Jabatan Kimia Malaysia, Dr Seah Lay Hong duduk di antara Peguam Cara Negara II, Datuk Yusof Zainal Abiden Noorn Badaruddin.

9.19 pagi: Dr McDonalds menerangkan kepada mahkamah cara untuk mengekstrak DNA daripada sel sperma.

9.29 pagi: Menurutnya, bahan kimia dikenali dengan nama DTT digunakan untuk mengekstrak DNA daripada sel sperma.

9.34 pagi: DTT akan 'membuka' kepala sperma membolehkan DNA diekstrak, kata Dr MacDonalds.

9.35 pagi: Karpal singh tiba di mahkamah.

9.44 pagi: "Jika analisa DNA tidak dilakukan dengan betul, bolehkah kita anggap sebahagian DNA tidak datang daripada sperma?" tanya Ram Karpal

"Ya, sebahagian DNA boleh datang daripada sel-sel epitelia (kulit)," balas Dr McDonalds.

9.53 pagi: Berdasarkan pemerhatiannya, ada kemungkinan Dr Seah tidak melakukan ujian DTT dengan baik,  kata Dr McDonalds.

Berdasarkan pemerhatiannya, ia tidak dilakukan oleh Dr Seah, kata Dr McDonalds.

"Berdasarkan bukti Dr Seah, beliau tidak menjalankannya.

"Sebab beliau tidak tahu samada terdapat DNA sel epitelia (kulit) dalam sampel sperma yang diambil," kata Dr MacDonalds.

10.07 pagi: Dr Seah tidak boleh menganggap DNA Saiful yang dijumpai dalam putik kapas ditanda B8 dan B9 datang daripada kulit Saiful kerana beliau tiada bukti untuk membuktikannya, kata Dr MacDonalds.

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Program Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim Sempena Ramadhan

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 06:13 PM PDT

Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim akan menunaikan solat Isya dan Terawikh bersama jemaah Masjid Al-Husna,PJS 10,Petaling Jaya,Selangor hari ini Jumaat, 26 Ogos 2011. Majlis juga akan diselitkan dengan sesi Tazkirah yang akan disampaikan oleh beliau.

Pejabat Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Profil DNA Lelaki Y Tercemar, Kata Pakar Australia

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 04:35 AM PDT

The Malaysian Insider

Pakar dari Australia memberitahu mahkamah hari ini bahawa seorang saintis telah melakukan kesilapan ketika mengendalikan ujian profil DNA yang pihak pendakwa telah gunakan untuk mengaitkan tuduhan liwat ke atas Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim sebelum ini.

Dr Brian McDonald, saksi keempat pasukan pembela berkata, ahli kimia kerajaan Nor Aidora Saedon telah melakukan kesilapan besar dalam kiraan pada ujiannya sehingga menyebabkan Anwar telah diputuskan sebagai "lelaki Y", profil DNA yang didakwa ditemui pada dubur pengadu Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.

"Apa yang anda ada ialah campuran profil. Beliau melaporkannya sebagai satu prodil tunggal," kata Dr McDonald di Mahkamah Tinggi hari ini.

Kata beliau, Nor Aidora telah mencampur aduk garis panduan menjalankan proses ujian profil DNA, sehingga menyebabkannya memperoleh bacaan yang salah.

Perbicaraan membabitkan Ketua Pembangkang ini telah diberikan butiran analisis DNA secara terperinci termasuk penjelasan mendalam bagaimana untuk menanda dan membaca keputusan analisis.

"Jika ujian-ujian ini dijalankan di sekolah, beliau sudah pasti telah gagal," kata beliau lagi.

Pada Februari lalu, pasukan guaman Anwar berhujah dengan mempersoalkan profil-profil DNA yang diperoleh hasil ujian ke atas tuala.

Tuala itu diberikan kepada Anwar ketika ditahan di lokap ibu pejabat polis Kuala Lumpur tiga tahun lalu selepas dituduh meliwat Mohd Saiful.

Peguam pembela Ramkarpal Singh Deo berkata berdasarkan ujian "electropharogram" yang dijalankan oleh Nor Aidora ke atas tuala itu, analisis menunjukkan bahawa ada dua profil DNA — satu Lelaki Y dan satu lagi tidak diketahui profilnya.

Ketika memberi keterangan pada 23 Februari lalu, kata Nor Aidora, profil-profil DNA yang ditemui pada barang tersebut sepadan dengan lelaki tidak dikenali "lelaki Y", yang spermanya diperoleh dari dubur Saiful.

Keterangan pakar itu akan disambung esok.

Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s Statement From The Dock

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 03:51 AM PDT

DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI DI KUALA LUMPUR

DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN

PERBICARAAN JENAYAH NO: 45-9-2009

PENDAKWA RAYA

LAWAN

DATO' SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM

STATEMENT FROM THE DOCK

My name is Anwar bin Ibrahim. I am the leader of the Opposition in Parliament. In the 1990s, I was the Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister until September 1998 when then Prime Minister Dato' Seri Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad sacked me after I had refused to resign. He had told me to resign or face dire consequences including criminal prosecution for alleged sexual and corruption offences. I refused and all hell broke loose. My unceremonious and grossly unjust dismissal simultaneously orchestrated with a trial by media under Mahathir's complete control triggered mass and widespread demonstrations throughout the country and launched the movement for change and reform known in our history as the Reformasi era.

After a series of show trials during which every rule in the book on evidence and criminal procedure was violated with impunity at the hands of the prosecution and the courts, I was convicted and sentenced to a total of 15 years.

THE CHARGE AGAINST ME

First and foremost, I categorically deny the charge against me. I want to state in no uncertain terms that I have never had any sexual relations with the complainant Mohamed Saiful. His allegation is a blatant and vicious lie and will be proved to be so.

This is a vile and despicable attempt at character assassination.  In this regard, let me reiterate that they can do all they want to assassinate my character and sully my reputation and threaten me with another 20 years of imprisonment but mark my words, they won't be able to cow me into submission. On the contrary, it only serves to fortify my conviction that the truth will eventually prevail. Come what come may, I shall never surrender. With apologies to Jean Racine in Phaedra:

"You know how well your tyranny favours my temperament and strengthens me to guard the honour of my reputation."

Yes indeed, I will guard it with my life if I have to. And if I may bring the message closer to home, let me quote the words of Nelson Mandela in his speech made from the dock in the famous Rivonia show trial of 1963 under the Apartheid regime:

"I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."

Back in 1998, blindfolded and handcuffed, I was beaten senseless by the Inspector General of Police and left to die in the lock up at the Federal Police headquarters. However, it was by the grace of God that a few of the rank and file of the police took pity on me and nursed me to recover from the near lethal blows. There was then a cover up by Gani Patail (now the Attorney-General) and Musa Hassan (the IGP at the time that I was charged in this new episode) with the full knowledge and connivance of Dato' Yusuf, the current chief prosecutor in this trial. All these personalities were linked in one way or the other with the 1998 show trial and more insidiously with the suppression of evidence in respect of the black eye scandal and attempts to pervert the course of justice. These are the same personalities who are now actively involved in the current prosecution against me. Res ipsa loquitur, as they say, but in this regard I'm not talking about negligence but rather proof of criminality in this heinous plot betraying indeed "the deep damnation" of the conspiracy.

The circumstances are compelling that I elect to make a statement from the dock. And in this statement I shall attempt my utmost to place the truth ahead of the web of lies and deceit that has been spun thus far. To quote Shakespeare:

"And let us once again assail your ears,
That are so fortified against our story…"

Which has set me from the outset of the trial to have been deprived of a level playing field and subjected to inequality of arms vis-a-vis the prosecution.

The Prosecution's Failure to Discharge its Duties Professionally

1)    Even though these matters are done as a matter of routine in criminal proceedings, the Prosecution has consistently refused to disclose material critical to my defence, including: (a) prosecution witness list;

(b) primary hospital examination notes written by the medical examiners of the complainant at HBKL; (c) witness statements (including that of complainant); and (d) forensic samples and exhibits for independent examination and verification. All this has caused considerable prejudice to my defence and occasioned grave injustice. The only conclusion that one can reasonably draw from the prosecution's persistence in this act of perversity is that unseen hands are at work and it is certainly not the hand of God.

2)    Your failure to respond during the course of the trial to several attempts by persons hostile to me to discredit me by commenting on aspects of the trial. These included whether I should provide samples of his DNA; blaming the defence for the delay of the proceedings; and reporting on matters that were the subject of a suppression order. These public comments were made either in defiance of your orders that they not be made. They were made by UMNO officials and politicians, including Dato' Seri Najib orchestrated through the controlled electronic and print media, such as Utusan Malaysia, Berita Harian, the New Straits Times and TV3. The constant comments by the Prime Minister and UMNO officials in the media and adverse comments on the progress of the trial were clearly calculated to influence you and illustrates the political motive behind the charge.

3)    The latest act of blatant disregard occurred just last Tuesday and Wednesday over TV3 which broadcasted a pre-recorded interview with the complainant saying things which are clearly in contempt of the proceedings in respect of the trial. In particular, the audacious portrayal of himself as the victim who is a pious and God fearing Muslim who has sworn on the Quran that he is a witness of truth.

4)    But the truth is that even as the trial was in progress, the complainant who was engaged to someone else was shamelessly having an affair with a member of the prosecution team. Quite apart from the consequences of such an affair on the conduct of the prosecution, the complainant's facade of moral rectitude is shattered by this scandalous affair with the lady prosecutor who herself was also engaged with another man.

5)    In spite of all this, the complainant, assisted by the full force of the UMNO propaganda machine, via their media, has gone to town to vilify me. The point is that all comments were calculated to discredit me, adversely influence the course of the proceedings and to intimidate the witnesses at the trial. In spite of all these blatant transgressions, you have persistently refused to respond to any of these acts of contemptuous behaviour.

The solemn duty of a judge is not to sit mute when the law provides for a court of its own motion to issue show-cause notices against those who interfere in the administration of justice. I am reminded of the maxim Judex Habere Debet Duos Sales, Salem Sapicutiae, Ne Sit Insipidus, Et Salem Conscientiea, Ne Sit Diabolous, the English translation of which is,

'A judge should have two salts, the salt of wisdom, lest he be insipid; and the salt of conscience, lest he be devilish'.

The office of a judge is one of the most honourable in the country; he is the voice of the legislator and the organ for dispensing justice; he holds the balance between the executive and the subject.

Even more significantly, in the discharge of his duties, the judge should be mindful of Allah's command:

"…and let not hatred of others

Swerve you into error

And depart from justice.

Be just, that is nearer to piety

Fear Allah, For Allah is

well acquainted with all that you do"

Surah al-maidah: 8

In the middle of the Second World War in 1942, Lord Atkin, in Liversidge v Anderson, had occasion to say in the House of Lords,

'It has long been one of the pillars of freedom…that the judges are no respecters of persons and stand between the subject and any attempted encroachment on his liberty by the executive, alert to see that any coercive action is justified by law'

In my case, Y.A., presiding in an adversarial trial, had the residual power and the jurisdiction to have invoked Y.A.'s powers relating to contempt of court. Y.A. chose not to do so for reasons best known to Y.A.. What has happened is not in the best traditions of the Judiciary. In the ongoing Banting murder trial, the learned trial judge in that case, Y.A. Datuk Akhtar Tahir, took it upon himself to summon a local television producer over a clip it aired during its prime news slot relating to the defence in the murder trial of Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya and three others. A newspaper clipping of that report is annexed herewith. Y.A. Datuk Akhtar Tahir has courageously demonstrated judicial activism in the name of human rights and the essential requirement of a fair trial.

To compound the position to incredulity, the open scandal relating to DPP Farah Azlina Latiff having an affair with PW1 did not concern Y.A. This invidious relationship should have alerted Y.A. in that I was been denied a fair trial for the simple reason that Farah Azlina Latiff would have had access to the investigation papers being a member of the prosecution's team and, therefore, PW1 would, through this relationship, would have had knowledge of the statements given by witnesses, including my alibi witnesses in the course of the investigation.

Y.A. did not even chastise Farah Azlina Latiff for the illicit affair with SP1. All that was done was that Farah Azlina Latiff was taken off the prosecution team at the behest of the prosecution which was an open confirmation of the existence of that illicit affair. Farah Azlina Latiff did not deny the allegations against her. Neither was PW1 recalled by the prosecution to deny the existence of this unsavoury affair.

The Attorney-General had publicly stated the reasons would be given later to account for the sordid affair. That has yet to eventuate.

Yet, in the face of this, Y.A., at the close of the prosecution case, made a finding that PW1 was a truthful witness from this passage in the judgment as follows,

'Nothing came out from the lengthy cross-examination of PW1 or from the evidence of other prosecution's witnesses that could suggest what PW1 had told in his evidence was something which was not probable. I find PW1's evidence remains intact. He had truthfully and without embellishment or exaggeration in his evidence narrated in minute detail how he was sodomised by the accused on the date and at the place stated in the charge. I find him to be truthful witness and his evidence is reliable and if accepted would establish all the facts required to prove the charge against the accused.'

My lawyers had clearly made the submission that Y.A. had made a prejudgment when Y.A. ought to have only made findings as to who was telling the truth at the conclusion of the defence, in which event, I would have given evidence under oath. My lawyers did not, at any time, advert to the passage above in isolation. They zeroed in on the obvious, namely, whether a witness was truthful or not had to be decided at the close of the defence case. The provisions of section 182A(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code provided the judge with that guidance but to no avail. That section bears repeating. It states:

'At the conclusion of the trial, the court shall consider all the evidence adduced before it and shall decide whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.'

Pursuant to what I have stated above, I have been denied the benefit of putting up my defence under oath. That amounts to deprivation of a fair trial and the existence of a level playing field.

The Court of Appeal going out of line

My appeal to the Court of Appeal over the recusal of Y.A. on account of prejudgment, following which would have resulted in biasness was heard on 6th July, 2011. A copy of the order is annexed herewith. No written judgment was handed down by the Court of Appeal on 6th July. The appeal was dismissed summarily on the preliminary objection taken by the prosecution that the order appealed against was not a final order. Those were the reasons given in open court. Nothing more, nothing less. The Court of Appeal took no more than five minutes to dispose of the appeal.

Unbeknownst to me or my lawyers, there was at the same time a 40-page judgment under the hand of Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak also dated 6th July, 2011. A copy of that judgment is annexed herewith.

Why did the Court of Appeal not read out the 91 paragraphed grounds of judgment dated 6th July on 6th July itself? Obviously, this judgment was at hand on 6th July but had surreptitiously been concealed from my knowledge and the knowledge of the public. The letter dated 11th August, 2011 supplying a copy of this judgment to my lawyers is annexed herewith. As is usual, Y.A. must have had the benefit of reading this judgment which will further exacerbate your bias against me. The judgment is an open and flagrant attack on me to which I will advert in due course. Suffice to say at this juncture that here is a judgment of the Court of Appeal written after 6th July, 2011 which contains harsh criticism against me without my being given the opportunity to reply.

But that begs the question: the appeal had been dismissed in limine on the ground that the order appealed against was not a final order. That should have been the end of the matter because it followed that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. [Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak sat mute during the course of submissions on the preliminary objection]. The matter did not go beyond into the merits. That is what the Court of Appeal announced on 6th July without going an inch further. The preliminary objection is adverted to, not as the main part of the judgment. The major part of the judgment goes beyond. It is a frolic of his own used for the purpose of hitting out at me.

If that was so, why did Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak embark upon a relentless attack on me in the rest of the judgment? In fact, he had no jurisdiction to do so. This is a blatant abuse of judicial power, perhaps in a surreptitious attempt to curry favours of the political masters? Otherwise, how else can one explain as to why he embarked upon such a scurrilous attack on me by stating in the following paragraphs as numbered:

'[5] This case will fall in history. It will be chronicled as the only known case in our country or for that matter within the Commonwealth enclave where the appellant as an accused person persistently and consistently filed one application after another in an attempt to recuse the learned trial judge from hearing and continuing to hear the sodomy trial which is ongoing.

[6] It seems that the appellant here is trying his level best to scuttle his sodomy trial for reasons best known to him, much to the chagrin of the prosecution and the exasperation of the members of the public at large.

[15] It was certainly an uncalled for criticism [against the learned judge] bent to deceive and confuse the uninitiated. It is easy to criticise but it is always difficult to justify it.

[18] It is also difficult for us to accept that the Notice of Motion was filed out of a genuine belief that the learned trial judge had been biased against the appellant.

[49] The charge graphically described what the appellant did to Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan [PW1.] [It is elementary that it is the evidence, not the charge, which proves an offence].

[50] The trial was unduly prolonged. It received wide media coverage.

[56] After such a fine display of judicial impropriety, Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak now has audacity to patronize us about a sound judicial system by stating, in what sounds like a broken symbol, as follows:

'The perquisites of a sound judicial system are independence and impartiality. For an effective and a strong judicial system, the impartiality of its judges are of paramount importance. But it cannot be denied that the public's confidence in the judicial system is shaped and moulded more by appearances.

Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak rather ungraciously, and without jurisdiction, took a swipe at the judgment of his brother judges of the Court of Appeal including Richard Malanjum, now Chief Judge (Sabah and Sarawak), with the obvious purpose of humiliating them when stating:

'[72] Rowstead did not consider the "real danger of bias" test in determining whether the learned JC should have recused himself notwithstanding the Federal Court had earlier on applied the said test in:

(a) Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang v Syarikat Bekerjasama-sama Serbaguna Sungai Gelugor dengan Tanggungan [1999] 3 MLJ 1, FC; and

(b) Mohamed Ezam bin Mohd Nor & Ors v Ketua Polis Negara [2002] 1 MLJ 321, FC

[73] Consequently, Rowstead's suggestion that the request for recusal to be heard

by another judge is quite radical. We categorically say that the recusal request, like the present matter, was rightly heard at the first instance by the learned trial judge and followed by this court.

[74] Rowstead did not consider nor ventilate on section 3 of the CJA read with section 50(1)(a) of the CJA and the Explanatory Statement thereto.

[75] The recusal application housed in the Notice of Motion concerned a long protracted trial that saw the legal manoeuvrings activated by the appellant at every nook and corner in an attempt to scuttle the criminal trial of the appellant for an offence of sodomising PW1. It is the mother of all trials in Malaysia.'

[I had every right to exhaust all legal remedies open to me. No attempt has been made by anyone, or any quarter, to prevent me from doing so by seeking an order to declare me a vexatious litigant].

As alluded to earlier in this statement, Y.A. would have had the advantage of reading this judgment after it was distributed by letter dated 11th August, 2011. This, in effect, amounts to placing, by Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak, alleged bad character evidence on my behalf.

In view of this, how can I get a fair trial or even the semblance of one before the trial judge now who has been further put in a position to compound biasness against me?

How can I possibly give evidence under oath when the DPP has, in his possession, the same judgment which could be used against me in cross-examination? Y.A. cannot be disabused of what has been fed to Y.A. by Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak when delivering a judgment dated 6th July, 2011 which obviously, having regard to the length thereof, must have been prepared well before 6th July, 2011.

This is scandalous.

Then again, why wasn't the judgment which, even if written after midnight on 5th July, 2011 read out in open court so that I could counter and demolish all the allegations made against me by Y.A. Datuk Haji Abdul Malik Bin Haji Ishak?

It is elementary no one should be condemned, unheard. This is axiomatic. As far back as 12th August, 1999 the Federal Court, the highest court in the land, in Insas Bhd and Anor v Ayer Molek Rubber Company Bhd and others had occasion, after adverting to the authorities on the position to rule,

'The offensive remarks made by the Court of Appeal against the High Court, the applicants and their counsel ought to be expunged from the judgment of the Court of Appeal, as it had a tendency to bring the whole administration of law and order into disrepute. Judicial pronouncements should be judicial in nature and should not depart from sobriety, moderation, and reserve. It also should not display emotion and intemperance, as displayed in the judgment of the Court of Appeal.'

Adverting to an Indian Supreme Court case of State of Uttar Pradesh v Mohd Naim, the Federal Court had occasion to adopt what was said there as follows;

'If there is one principle of cardinal importance in the administration of justice, it is this: the proper freedom and independence of judges and magistrates must be maintained and they must be allowed to perform      their functions freely and fearlessly and without undue interference by anybody, even by this court. At the same time it is equally necessary that in expressing their opinions, judges and magistrates must be guided by considerations of justice, fair play and restraint. It is not infrequent that sweeping generalizations defeat the very purpose for which they are made. It has been judicially recognized that in the matter of making disparaging remarks against persons or authorities whose conduct comes into consideration before courts of law in cases to be decided by them, it is relevant to consider: (a) whether the party  whose conduct is in question is before the court or has an opportunity of explaining or defending himself; (b) whether there is evidence on  record bearing on that conduct justifying the remarks; and (c) whether  it is necessary for the decision of the case, as an integral part thereof, to animadvert on conduct. It has also been recognized that judicial pronouncements must be judicial in nature, andshould not normally depart from sobriety, moderation and reserve.'

In Insas, the Federal Court adopted what was said in AM Mathur v Pramod Kumar Gupta & Ors when dismissing an apparently unsustainable review petition which had certain derogatory remarks against Mr AM Mathur, a senior advocate and also the ex-Advocate General of the State. The Court had occasion to hold,
'Judicial restraint and discipline are as necessary to the orderly administration of justice as they are to the effectiveness of the army. The duty of restraint, this humility of function should be a constant theme of our judges. This quality in decision-making is as much necessary for judges to command respect as to protect the independence of the judiciary. Judicial restraint in this regard might be better called judicial respect, that is, respect by the judiciary. Respect to those who come before the court as well as to other co-ordinate branches of the State, the executive and the legislature. There must be mutual respect. When these qualities fail or when litigants and public believe that the judge has failed in these qualities, it will be neither good for the judge nor for the judicial process. The Judge's Bench is a seat of power. Not only do judges have power to make binding decisions, their decisions legitimate the use of power by other officials. The judges have the absolute and unchallengeable control of the court domain. But they cannot misuse their authority by intemperate comments, undignified banter of scathing criticism of counsel, parties or witnesses. We concede that the court had the inherent power to act freely upon its own conviction on any matter coming before it for adjudication, but it is a general principle of the highest importance to the proper administration of justice that derogatory remarks ought not to be made against persons or authorities whose conduct comes into consideration unless it is absolutely necessary for the decision of the case to animadvert on their conduct.'

Chief Justice of India, Bhagwati, in State of Madya Pradesh & Ors v Nandlal & Ors, in expressing his strong disapproval of the strictures made by the judge, stated:

'We may observe in conclusion that judges should not use strong and carping language while criticizing the conduct of parties or their witnesses. They must act with sobriety, moderation and restraint. They must have the humility to recognize that they are not infallible and any harsh and disparaging strictures passed by them against any party may be mistaken and unjustified and if so, they may do considerable harm and mischief and result in injustice. Here, in the present case, the observations made and strictures passed by BM Lal J were totally unjustified and unwarranted and they ought not to have been made.'

How could I under these circumstances give evidence under oath?

Y.A., when making the order for the witnesses offered to the defence for interview in court, gave a lifeline to the witnesses in stating in open court that they could refuse to be interviewed. Y.A. did not in doing so evenly handle the scales of justice. Y.A. created and perpetuated an imbalance unbecoming anyone holding the mantle of justice. In fact, the Prime Minister, Dato' Seri Najib Tun Razak, and his wife, Datin Seri Rosmah binti Mansor, former Inspector General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, and SAC Dato' Rodhwan bin Ismail who featured prominently in the evidence of PW1 came to the interview room echoing similar protests namely, "We are not prepared to be interviewed" with the Prime Minister saying Y.A. suggested this could be done. These were material witnesses compelling the defence now to resort to causing subpoenas to be issued for their presence.

Y.A. has created a position under which I cannot give evidence under oath. I say, with all the force at my command, that I would have been prepared and willing to give evidence under oath but for the handicaps foisted on me, in the manner Y.A. has conducted the trial and in the manner in which the Court of Appeal judgment dated 6th July, 2011 would have come to the notice of Y.A. with regard to what I have stated herein before.

My trial is an adversarial one and Y.A. ought not to have descended into the arena by suggesting witnesses offered to the defence could deny to be interviewed. It did not come within the province of Y.A. to do so.

My alibi witnesses made known to the prosecution were in fact included in the prosecution list of witnesses which was not supplied to my lawyers. They were defence alibi witnesses. I am informed this is the first time this has been done.

In fact, the owner of the unit 11-5-2, Haji Hasanuddin bin Abd Hamid, had been harassed by the police for  a total of thirty hours in the recording of his statements which were all video recorded. This was obvious when he was interviewed by the defence lawyers in my presence. The police investigation has scuttled my defence.

To make a mockery of the situation, the prosecution offered at the close of their case an alibi witness named, Fitria binti Dipan, who by their own admission cannot be traced.

THE COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATIONS ARE PURE FABRICATION

As I have said at the outset, I categorically deny the allegations made against me by the complainant.

The complainant stated in evidence on 26th June, 2008 he arrived at Kondominium Desa Damansara at 2.45 p.m. to discuss work matters and hand-over documents given to him by one Ibrahim Yaakob [my Chief of Staff] to myself. He says he stopped his van at the security post and mentioned the code name 'Mokhtar' to the guards at the condominium before being allowed in. He parked his vehicle and took the lift to Unit 11-5-1 where I was allegedly seated at a dining table in the living room. He says he sat down at the same table and started the discussion. He told the court of the crude manner in which I had allegedly asked for sex.

The following appears in his evidence thereafter (as attached)

When questioned, he answered that he was angry and scared and that he was not prepared to do it but purportedly because I had appeared angry, he eventually obliged. It has to be observed at this stage the complainant could have, on his own admission in examination-in-chief, left the room as there is no evidence of any attempt by me to latch the door from inside.

He had further alleged that he was ordered into the bedroom and that he did enter out of fear. Even at this stage, the complainant had the opportunity to leave the living room. He did not do so. The rest of the evidence in this regard clearly showed that the complainant had every opportunity on every occasion to flee but he did not do so. His reason was that he was petrified by fear. But such a reason flies against the facts. Here is a man in his early twenties, a six-footer, physically fit and robust and with powerful connections in the top police brass as well as the political elite with access to the very inner sanctum of power. Additionally, he has also been a key UMNO student operative, having undergone the rigorous training conducted by the Biro Tats Negara of the Prime Minister's Department. And here I was a 60-year-old man with a history of back injury who had undergone a major back surgery holding no position of power. If indeed I could have exercised any kind of undue influence or mental pressure on him, this could have been easily neutralized by a quick phone call to his connections. As regards the fear of physical harm, it would take a great stretch of the imagination to suggest that I could pose any physical harm to him.

Under cross-examination, the following significant evidence was elicited from the complainant. He admitted that he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it. He claimed that carnal intercourse took place and that it was painful and coarse. However, this was clearly not borne out in the medical evidence in the prosecution case suggesting fissures or tears. After the alleged act, he testified that he had a drink and engaged in a friendly conversation with me. Startlingly, no attempt was made by the complainant to seek immediate medical attention. Instead, he attended a PKR function the following day. In the evening, he joined a meeting of the Anwar Ibrahim Club at my house without showing any sign of either emotional or physical discomfort let alone trauma. On the contrary, he was going about matters in a calm and confident manner. His conduct therefore is totally inconsistent with having been violated. In any event, he neither made a police report nor sought medical attention, notwithstanding that two days prior to the alleged act, he had met with Najib and Rosmah as well having talked on the phone with Musa Hassan and met with Rodhwan at a hotel.

It is obvious, from the evidence above, that the complainant was lying through his teeth although Y.A., despite the compelling evidence to the contrary, found him a truthful witness at the close of the prosecution case. This defies logic, let alone the law.

Then again, the expert evidence with regard to DNA led in the course of prosecution case through PW4, Dr. Seah Lay Hong and PW5, Nor Aidora bt Saedon was highly questionable in that crucial information pertaining to the DNA analysis of both the said witnesses which they were obliged to furnish to the court was suspiciously withheld despite them confirming the existence of such information. The real possibility that the samples analyzed were contaminated and even planted were completely disregarded despite such possibilities coming clearly within guidelines set by the international forensic community which were completely ignored, if not, blatantly disregarded by PW4 and PW5 to fit the prosecution's case. It is obvious had the said possibilities been explored, the conclusions reached would have been very different in that the complainant's own semen was found in his own anus, there was ample evidence of contributors other than Male Y around the complainant's perianal, lower and higher rectal region and there was clear evidence of the samples having been tampered with before they were sent for analysis. In such circumstances, the integrity of the said samples was surely compromised. Furthermore, the impartiality of PW4 was highly questionable having regard to the way in which she completely dismissed the very high possibility that the samples sent to her would have degraded to a certain degree by the time they reached her which such degradation was completely absent from all samples in this case. This clearly points to the obvious reality that the samples sent for analysis could not have been what were extracted from the complainant's person.

Trial within a Trial

The Gestapo-like manner in which I was arrested and the subsequent detention and interrogation by the police all betrayed the hands of the political masters at work. What was the need to send in balaclava clad commandos to effect the arrest if not to attempt to flex political muscle and to display pure vindictiveness? These startling facts were completely ignored by Y.A.

Y.A. had made an earlier ruling to exclude the recovery of certain items including water bottle, Good Morning towel, tooth paste from the lock-up at IPK, Kuala Lumpur where I had been detained overnight from 16.7.08 to 17.7.08. However, you reversed this ruling subsequently which is something most shocking and unprecedented.

Although in the Trial Within a Trial, I had adverted to the role of Taufik and Supt. Jude Pereira, the prosecution elected only to call Taufik in rebuttal in the Trial Within a Trial. Taufik attempted to produce a photostat copy of the warrant of arrest which was only marked as an ID and, therefore, could not be considered as evidence in the Trial Within a Trial. A photostat copy of a document is not admissible as evidence in a court of law. It was in the Trial Within a Trial that primary evidence of the document ought to have been given if the original record had been lost or destroyed.

The prosecution could not, by producing the original warrant of arrest in the main trial, cure the infirmity. It is in evidence that 3 copies of the warrant of arrest were in the possession of Supt. Jude Pereira. The evidence of the warrant of arrest was available during the Trial Within a Trial.

Even Supt. Jude Periera, whose role was adverted to by me during the Trial Within a Trial, chose not to take the stand despite having had the opportunity to have produced the original copy of the warrant of arrest in the Trial Within a Trial.

It was during the Trial Within a Trial that Supt.Jude Periera should have testified. It was clearly unlawful for the court to accept Supt. Jude Periera's evidence in the general trial for the purpose of rebutting my evidence in the Trial Within a Trial that the DNA profiling from the Good Morning towel, toothbrush and mineral water bottle had been obtained by unfair methods and unfair means and my arrest, therefore, had been procured unlawfully.

In fact, Supt. Jude Periera's evidence in the general trial confirms that there had been non-compliance with Rule 20 of the Lock-up Rules, 1953 in that I, after my arrest on 16.7.08, had not been placed in the lock-up from 6pm to 6am the following day. The provisions of Rule 20 are mandatory.

If this was the position in our case, which it was, then, clearly, my being taken to the HKL in breach of Rule 20 reflected unfair means and unfair methods being employed by the police to obtain the DNA profiling from the items set out hereinbefore. The position is further compounded by the evidence of Supt. Jude Periera in the general trial that he did not direct police personnel in charge of the lock-up not to touch the said items despite the police personnel in the general trial before the Trial Within a Trial, clearly, saying that Supt. Jude Periera had done so.

So the position comes to this, Supt. Jude Periera, in his evidence on oath in the main trial, supports the defence case that unfair methods and unfair means had been used by the police to obtain DNA profiling from the items set out hereinbefore.

From the ruling made by the court to exclude the items, it is clear it was based on unfair means and unfair methods employed by the police meaning it was by trick and deception that the police attempted to introduce the DNA evidence.

In any event, from the evidence of DSP Taufik given in the Trial Within a Trial and the general trial, the grounds of arrest could not have been given by him to me in Segambut as this is, clearly, contradicted by the evidence of S.N. Nair and myself.

The question of challenging evidence given in the main trial by DSP Taufik and Supt. Jude Periera does not arise. It was the assertions made under oath by me that my arrest was unlawful and unfair methods and unfair means had been used to obtain his DNA profiling in the Trial Within a Trial stood unchallenged by the prosecution by leading lawful evidence in rebuttal of those assertions. In fact, Y.A. should have drawn an adverse inference against the prosecution for not having done so.

FORENSIC EVIDENCE

The prosecution case rests on the evidence of the DNA and so called "findings of seminal fluid" or "sperm" as they claim. As a matter of fact, this is the only forensic evidence upon which the foundation of the prosecution's so-called proof rests. Yet, this foundation is erected on shaky grounds though this has not prevented them working in hand in glove with the powers that be to mount an insidious and relentless campaign to vilify me.

The fact is that there is not an iota of evidence, DNA or otherwise, that has ever been found in the premises of the alleged act, not in the wash room, bed room, carpets or anywhere else where such evidence ought to have been found.

Supt. Pereira, despite being instructed to keep the HKL samples (marked B1 to B10) in a freezer, deliberately defied the instruction of Dr Siew Sheue Fong (HKL Forensic Doctor) and also admitted that he was in serious breach of the IGSO, (he even stated he took full and personal responsibility for breaking of the IGSO), when he deliberately kept the HKL samples in his office cabinet for about 43 hrs before delivering them to the Chemist. One must not forget that the alleged act was supposed to have occurred two days prior to the said samples having been extracted. Coupled with this 43-hour delay in delivery to the Chemist, it would mean that the samples were already at least 90 hours old by the time they were examined by the Chemist. Undoubtedly, the samples would have totally degraded. Yet evidence by the prosecution claimed that no degradation of any consequence had occurred.

In any event, even the 43-hour delay alone would have seriously compromised the integrity of the samples in terms of its deterioration due to bacterial action. Also, by not storing the samples in the police exhibit store (which will accord access only to him), his deliberate omission of such strict rules of the IGSO has by his very act, presented an opportunity and possibility of tampering of the samples as access to others was made easier. This was disregarded.

There are also no cogent or compelling reasons both in law and practice for Supt Jude Pereira to cut open P27 (the big tamperproof bag containing all the HKL samples which was sealed and handed over to him), ostensibly to remark them (B1 to B10). It is clear that this act was just a convenient excuse to get access to the individual samples which by themselves were clearly not tamperproof as they were deliberately "sealed" with ordinary and easily removable tapes and easily removable HKL paper seals.

Dr Siew Sheue Fong , as evident in court, was most reluctant to refer to his medical notes during cross examination despite being unable to remember details. During the break he was caught surreptitiously taking a sneak peek of his notes. This dishonest act of a professional doctor who ought to have conducted himself in a fair and independent manner was blatantly ignored. Many a time Dr. Siew and Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim deliberately chose not to answer pertinent questions put to them by my counsel. Instead Dr Siew  and Dr Razali's evidence was accepted without reservation.

Dr Seah Lay Hong  (the Chemist) gave evidence that when she received the 12 HKL samples there were 2 samples that were marked as taken on very different dates, she testified she did nothing to seek clarification from Dr Siew . She further testified that she "gave the benefit of doubt" to Dr Siew. My lawyers submitted strenuously that such acts and/or omissions amount to a serious breach of the cardinal rules of international lab protocols and those of the Jabatan Kimia Malaysia. Despite such blatant exposures and abject failures of non observance of strict rules, Dr Seah's evidence was well received and in totality when it ought to have been jettisoned in totality for reasons of incompetence and gross negligence.

The defence evidence will show that the prosecution claim to have proof of the presence of "seminal fluid" or "sperm" is completely unfounded. In fact, this purported proof is nothing but pure fabrication, a fact which is not that unusual considering the past history of the prosecution in this regard. If they had had any such forensic evidence, they would have guarded it for dear life rather than let it being handled in such a sloppy manner.

SUMMATION

Your Lordship has failed to ensure a fair trial as demonstrated, inter alia, by the following instances:

1. Your refusal during the course of the trial to order disclosure of material critical to my defence, most of which you thought was sufficiently relevant and which fairness required that you should order it to be disclosed before the trial. Your failure to fairly and properly exercise his judicial discretion to order disclosure was not only contrary to Malaysian laws but violated the international standards expected of a modern state which purports to practice the rule of law.

2. Your refusal to act accordingly either to take cognizance or to hold to account those responsible for the flagrant acts of leaking and publishing in the media of prosecution submissions before the matter was heard in court; your utter indifference to my protestations about these transgressions has wittingly or unwittingly facilitated the conspiracy to vilify me in the court of public opinion even as the trial is in progress.

3. Your failure to order that witnesses critical to my defence attend the trial to testify, in circumstances where their involvement was patently material to the issues at trial and recorded under oath in the complainant's testimony and admitted by statements made by these witnesses to the media. These witnesses relate to the circumstances in which the complainant came to make his early complaints against me. Nothing could be more material to the credit of the complainant.

4. Your finding the complainant to be "a truthful witness" at the close of the prosecution case clearly amounted to prejudgment demonstrating in the process a clear bias against me. Consequently, you have deprived me of my constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair hearing the effect of which is to entitle me to an unconditional release with the charges leveled against me falling to the ground. Notwithstanding this, you have not only failed to order my release but have adamantly refused to recuse yourself from further presiding at the trial.

5. Your arriving at the conclusion that the complainant was a witness of truth without first hearing the evidence of the defence would render the continuation of this trial an exercise in futility. What use would there be for me to adduce evidence to show that the complainant is in fact a liar if you have already found "him to be a truthful witness" and that his evidence is reliable and conclusive and by virtue of that irrefutable? It is untenable and the law does not allow you to do what you have done.

6. Your finding that the complainant has corroborated himself by complaining to the medical doctors of sexual assault was a glaring error of law apart from it being in gross disregard of a finding of fact, that is, that the clinical finding had indicated no evidence of penetration. Additionally, your failure to question why the prosecution has for no apparent reason refused to call in the first medical officer who had examined the complainant to testify. Did it not cross your mind that this failure was prompted by the need to suppress evidence that might be unfavourable to the prosecution?

7. Your accepting without hesitation the forensic evidence as corroborative of the complainant's account in circumstances where there were obvious concerns about how those samples were obtained, labelled, stored and analyzed.

CONCLUSION

This entire process is nothing but a conspiracy by Prime Minister Dato' Seri Najib Razak to send me into political oblivion by attempting once again to put me behind bars. I therefore declare that I have no faith whatsoever that justice will prevail in these proceedings notwithstanding the valiant efforts made by my defence team. As I have said at the outset, this is not a criminal trial. It is a charade staged by the powers that be to put me out of action in order that they remain in power.

In 1998, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad did just that and by his Machiavellian use of all the organs of power of the State, succeeded in getting me convicted for fifteen years for offences that I had never committed. Such was the tyranny and injustice done to me then. And such is the tyranny and injustice being perpetuated today.

Najib Razak is doing the same thing as his mentor did, which is to employ all means within his power through the media, the police, the Attorney General and the judiciary in order to subvert the course of justice and to take me out of the political equation.

This relentless conviction to send me back to prison became all the more imperative because of the major victories gained by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat in the March 2008 elections. Their worst fears were confirmed when it became clear that once my legal disqualification was over I would be contesting for a parliamentary seat and if I won, would be elected leader of the opposition.

It was therefore no coincidence that this new conspiracy surfaced three months after the March 2008 victories and the formal charge against me was made just one month prior to my contesting the Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat. The sequence of events that unfolded prior to the formal charge appeared to be lifted from the plot of 1998 minus, in this latest episode, the black eye affair and the purported victims being led into court as partners in crime. In this second episode, the conspirators have tweaked the plot to make the complainant take on the role of a helpless victim, having realized that the 1998 method of employing Stalin-like confessions and the portrayal of the alleged victims as remorseful and repentant sexual deviants were just too much for the public to believe.

Hence, during the entire examination of the complainant, the prosecution left no stone unturned in their attempt at painting the picture of a helpless, naive and innocent young man who is a witness of truth and whose testimony should be believed regardless of any evidence to the contrary. The fact is that in the entire scheme of things, the complainant, who was just a university drop out working part time helping out my chief of staff, is essentially a pawn being employed by the shady plotters to achieve their devious ends in the conspiracy. And yet it was the decision of the court after the close of the prosecution case that he indeed is a truthful witness.

The preparation entailed in this conspiracy was most elaborate and went all the way to the Prime Minister himself and his wife Rosmah Mansor both of whom by the complainant's own admission had met him in their residence where he purportedly complained of being sexually assaulted. The initial statement by Najib that he had met with the complainant merely to discuss about a scholarship was a blatant lie only to be retracted later after various exposes were made via the social media and the internet blogs. It was obvious that neither Najib nor Rosmah would not want to be seen to be part of the conspiracy being themselves embroiled in a series of other scandals the details of which have been raised in Parliament which to date have never been categorically refuted. But the stakes in this conspiracy are so high that nothing can be left to pure chance for indeed the prospect of the UMNO led Barisan Nasional losing power to Pakatan Rakyat is becoming more real by the day.

The main thrust of the conspiracy was to fabricate this sodomy charge in order to inflict maximum damage to my character in the run-up campaign to the by-elections.  Towards this end, an intense and virulent media blitz was launched concurrently with the staging of rallies and ceramahs where the focus of the debate was not on any social, economic or even political issues but purely on my person and my morality. The plotters for reasons known only to themselves became privy to information which would be used subsequently by the prosecution and went to town in an orgy of character assassination calculated no doubt to ensure a humiliating defeat for me in the polls. But Allah is Great and instead of losing, I won the Permatang Pauh seat with a thumping majority of 15,000 votes.

But the zeal to consign me to political oblivion continues unabated. Najib seems to think that by destroying my political future, it would also destroy the prospects of Pakatan Rakyat ever coming to power.

Hence, nothing is spared to ensure that I will be convicted in order that the UMNO led Barisan government continues to rule.

Having regard to all the above, I now wish to state that this trial is for all intents and purposes a show trial. I say this not to mock your Lordship nor with animosity towards anyone personally but I sit before you in the dock only to speak what I know and what I believe with conviction to be the truth. And this conviction is borne by having been in public service for more than forty years a quarter of which was spent within the walls of incarceration in Kamunting and in Sungai Buloh. The fact remains that I was condemned to imprisonment not because of any crime that I had committed but for my political beliefs and convictions and more significantly because back in 1998 I had posed a clear and present threat to the more than two decades of autocratic rule of Mahathir.

I say it because as I've stated earlier, the court's integrity has been completely compromised and bears all the classic symptoms of a show trial where the script has been effectively written and the outcome a foregone conclusion. I say it because as a presiding judge you have demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt your complete lack of impartiality. I say it because you have consistently refused to recuse yourself even in the face of mounting evidence of your bias against me. I say it too because you have persistently turned a blind eye to the gross violations of protocol and procedure committed by the prosecution while at the same remaining impervious to my protestations about these blatant irregularities that would have without more alerted any impartial judge as to the malice and bad faith of the prosecution.

In the matter of the duty of a judge, the Holy Qur'an commands:

"And when you judge between mankind

Then you judge justly"

Surah An-Nisaa:58

ANWAR IBRAHIM

Fitnah II: Bukti Pendakwa Raya Tidak Lengkap, Diubahsuai- Peguam

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 03:43 AM PDT

Keadilan Daily

Pasukan peguam Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim mendedahkan bahawa bukti yang dibawa ke mahkamah oleh pendakwa dalam kes Fitnah II sebenarnya tidak lengkap dan diubahsuai.

Ia diketahui melalui saksi kelima peguam bela iaitu pakar molekul genetik, Dr Brian McDonalds dari Australia.

Dr McDonalds dalam keterangannya memberitahu mahkamah, calitan kapas yang diambil dari tubuh pengadu, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan sepatutnya terus diletakkan di atas slaid kaca dan diteliti di bawah mikroskop selain disimpan di dalam botol plastik oleh pegawai penyiasat.

Penelitian di bawah mikroskop itu menurut Dr McDonalds, membolehkan doktor atau saintis mengetahui terus samada calitan yang diambil itu merupakan calitan air mani atau pun tidak.

Tindakan pegawai penyiasat, Jude Pereira menyimpan sampel itu di pejabatnya selama dua hari pada suhu bilik juga menimbulkan keraguan kerana ia mungkin diubahsuai dan tercemar.

Peguam kepada Anwar, Sankara Nair ketika mengulas berkata, langkah itu sepatutnya dilakukan kerana ia prosedur biasa dalam mana-mana kes serangan seksual.

Namun, katanya, dalam kes Fitnah II ini ia tidak pula dibuat.

"(Sepatutnya) boleh tengok terus, untuk tahu samada (sampel) mengandungi air mani atau tidak.

"Pada peringkat itu, ia kepunyaan siapa tidak penting kerana ia boleh diketahui kemudian.

"Di Malaysia, kita tidak lakukan perkara ini tetapi di Australia mereka buat," kata Sankara ketika ditemui di perkarangan Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur hari ini.

Dalam kenyataannya pada sebelah petang, Dr Brian MacDonalds mempertikai kandungan DNA yang tinggi dalam sampel air mani yang dianalisa Jabatan Kimia Malaysia.

Menurutnya, sampel air mani yang berada di dalam rektum seorang lelaki selama lebih 56 jam sebelum calitan air mani itu diambil dengan putik kapas sepatutnya mempunyai kandungan DNA yang sudah merosot.

(Saiful diperiksa pada 28 Jun, 2008 – selepas lebih dua hari dari masa kejadian liwat didakwa berlaku pada 26 Jun 2008).

Ditambah pula ia disimpan selama lebih dua hari oleh pegawai penyiasat Jude Pereira di pejabatnya pada suhu bilik dan tidak disejukbeku, sampel itu sepatutnya sudah tidak boleh digunakan kerana terdapat kemungkinan ia sudah dicemari bakteria lain yang tumbuh, kata Dr MacDonalds.

Ini berlawanan dengan laporan Ahli Kimia, Dr Seah Lay Hong yang mendapati terdapat banyak DNA 'segar' sewaktu beliau menganalisa sampel dari HKL yang diserahkan Jude Pereira.

Perkara ini, kata Sankara Nair, adalah tidak tepat dan tidak masuk akal.

Ia juga meyakinkan Sankara dan pasukannya bahawa bukti itu diubahsuai sebelum ia sampai ke Jabatan Kimia untuk dianalisa.

"Kerana itu kami katakan ia (mungkin) diubahsuai. Bagaimana ia diubahsuai, kami tidak tahu tetapi kami yakin ia diubahsuai.

"(Lebih meragukan), Dr Seah sendiri sewaktu memberikan keterangan dahulu enggan memberikan penjelasan terperinci bagaimana beliau menganalisa sampel itu.

"Beliau juga enggan menerangkan bagaimana kit ujian yang digunakan," kata Sankara.

Ketua Wanita KEADILAN Bukit Gelugor Peluk Islam

Posted: 24 Aug 2011 08:42 PM PDT

Dari Blog Milo Suam

Tiga hari lepas, Ketua Wanita Bukit Gelugor Cheryl Chew menghubungi isteri sharpshooter dan menceritakan hasratnya untuk memeluk Islam dan beliau meminta supaya beri cadangan nama Islam yang sesuai untuknya.

Beliau berbual panjang dengan isteri sharpshooter dan menceritakan beberapa masalah yang beliau hadapi dan beliau diberi kata-kata semangat, peransang agar tabah dengan ujian baru yang beliau hadapi.

Alhamdulillah kelmarin di Pejabat JIM Bukit Malawati jam 3.00 petang, akhirnya beliau melafazkan kalimah syahadah untuk memeluk Islam. Sesungguhnya hidayah itu mutlak datang dari Allah SWT, manusia tidak mampu memberi hidayah bahkan Nabi Muhammad sendiri tidak boleh memberi hidayah.

Sharpshooter difahamkan Ketua AMK Cabang Sekijang, Raymond Ng Kien Seng juga telah memeluk agama Islam dan telah selamat dinikahkan dengan pasangannya, Nor Hasnanie Jamil, Setiausaha PKR Cabang Sekijang pada 22 Ogos yang lepas. Alhamdulillah…Cahaya Ramadhan…Allahuakbar…

Dari blog milo suam – Berita gembira buat kita semua dalam bulan Ramadhan yang penuh barakah ini apabila Ketua Wanita KEADILAN Bukit Gelugor, Cheryl Chew memeluk Islam petang semalam.

Beliau melafazkan kalimah Syahadah pada pukul 3.00 petang semalam di pejabat JIM Bukit Malawati. Dimaklumkan bahawa beliau kini menggunakan nama Huda Chew.

Antara rakan-rakan Cheryl yang menitiskan air mata kegembiraan dengan keislaman beliau. Dimaklumkan juga bahawa beliau menerima banyak hadiah berupa tafsir Al-Quran dan buku-buku agama dari rakan-rakan terdekat.

Difahamkan, sebelum ini Cheryl telah mula berpuasa dan mendalami Islam secara berperingkat sebelum mengambil keputusan untuk memeluk Islam di dalam hari yang bersejarah semalam.

Tinjauan ReJaM© di facebook menyaksikan Cheryl sudah menukar namanya kepada Huda Chew Hong Wah [Facebook Cheryl]

Jika tiada aral melintang, ReJaM© akan merakam temubual khas bersama Cheryl dalam masa terdekat untuk dikongsikan bersama anda semua Insya Allah.

Kepada Cheryl, selamat menikmati keindahan Islam.

Response to Asia Sentinel ‘Why Did Malaysia’s Anwar Say Too Much’

Posted: 24 Aug 2011 08:32 PM PDT

I am responding to the Asia Sentinel report 'Why Did Malaysia's Anwar Say Too Much'.[http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3404&Itemid=178].

There are several glaring mistakes in the report. John Berthelsen the author has made some amendments to the original report but I believe it is important to note that there other glaring mistakes including the underlying insinuation of the report.

In the first version of the report, the author wrote:

“He served six years before he was pardoned on the sexual perversion charges.” [para. 2]

It has since been amended to:

"He served six years before the sexual perversion charges were overturned."

The fact is that Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy conviction was overturned by the Federal Court on 2 September 2004.

The more contentious part of the report was this paragraph, where the author originally wrote:

"Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar's condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, he admitted that"he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it" to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act.

"That sentence would tend to invalidate any assumption that the then-60-year-old Anwar suddenly forced himself on the 24-year-old aide. If, as Anwar says, Saiful brought the lubricant with him, it would certainly indicate that Saiful knew what he was getting into when he went to Anwar's condo that night.

"This in turn is hardly helpful for Anwar, who is on trial for his political life in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur over the allegations, because Saiful's statement has the ring of truth to it. If you are going to make up a story about being forced into a sex act, you would hardly acknowledge that you voluntarily lubricated your own anus."[paras. 3-5]

The first 'he' in para. 3 has been amended to Saiful as it was not apparent on whether the pronoun was referring to Anwar or Saiful in the first version.

But there are other glaring mistakes in the report that have not been amended.

In para. 4 it was mentioned that Saiful went to the condo at night when Saiful went to the condo at about 2.30 pm.

The insinuation by the author was also that Anwar was alone, waiting for Saiful. Anwar was in a meeting with a group of economists for a briefing. None of them were called upon by the prosecution as they would confirm Anwar was with them for the briefing. The defence are calling them as witnesses.

The defence also has repeatedly reaffirmed that Saiful was not in the particular condo unit. What the prosecution has done has to prove that Saiful was in the elevator and stopped at the same floor as the condo unit. But none of those with Anwar saw Saiful coming in and the prosecution has also not produced any evidence on the contrary.

The curious report, which includes the Lee Kuan Yew statement leaked by Wikileaks that Anwar walked into a trap seems to have the objective of confirming the former Singapore PM's statement. Unfortunately it is littered with glaring mistakes obvious to anyone who has been following the trial closely and objectively.

Anyone who has read Anwar's defence statement will see that every notion of a fair trial has been ignored in this obvious case of political persecution.

NIK NAZMI NIK AHMAD
COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT

Tiada ulasan:

Catat Ulasan