Saying he was not surprised by the High Court’s decision ordering him to enter defence in the allegation of sodomy against him, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim today wondered whether there was any more room left for him to get justice.
“I expected the judge’s decision but deeply regret the strange judgement fully defending the prosecution as perfect.
“Is there still room for me to defend myself?” twitted Anwar in an immediate response.
High Court judge Zabidin Mohd Diah today said there was a prima faciecase against Anwar over allegation by Saiful Bukhari Azlan that he was sodomised in 2008, and set the trial date to resume on June 6.
Earlier, a large crowd turned up at the court house to express support for Anwar. They included PAS vice president Mahfuz Omar, PKR deputy president Azmin Ali, PKR vice president Tian Chua, Selangor state executive councillor Ronnie Liu, as well as Anwar’s wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and daughter Nuzul Izzah.
The once-rejected DNA samples taken from three items in a cell where Anwar spent the night on July 16, 2008 became a crucial turnaround for the case, after the judge’s reversal in March to allow the prosecution to admit them as evidence.
Nik Aziz: Stay strong
Accuser Saiful was however absent in court today.
Judge Zabidin praised Saiful as a reliable witness, although during the trial, lead counsel Karpal Singh had several times shown how Saiful had lied in court.
“I find Saiful’s evidence remains intact. I find him to be a truthful witness and reliable,” said Zabidin.
Meanwhile, PAS Murshidul Am Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat advised Anwar to be patient, reminding him that tyranny would be defeated in the end.
“I advise DSAI (Anwar) to have patience, tyranny will be defeated in the end,” he said.
It’s very clear that DSAI is tried to be convicted in any circumstances whatsoever,” added Nik Aziz.
The arrest of IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn is a terminal blow to his hopes of becoming French president, but part of the blame must be laid on France’s political culture, Britain’s press said Tuesday.
The International Monetary Fund head, who was in the running to represent the Socialist party in France’s 2012 presidential race, was Monday in the notorious Rikers Island prison after being denied bail by a New York judge.
“No bailout for IMF chief” ran the Independent as its headline, reflecting Monday’s court decision and the banker’s role in securing financial rescues for Greece, Portugal and Ireland.
“There seems little doubt, unless Strauss-Kahn is cleared within days, that (his presidential) race will not now take place,” Guardian journalist Jon Henley wrote.
Strauss-Kahn denied Monday sexually assaulting a New York hotel chambermaid, but the judge turned down his $1 million bail offer.
Although sympathy was in short supply, Britain’s main broadsheets agreed that France’s “fascination with political seducers” and strict privacy laws had contributed to Strauss-Kahn’s predicament.
“Suave, permatanned and plainly not short of a franc or two… Strauss-Kahn remains almost a caricature champagne socialist,” a profile of the banker in the centre-left Guardian added.
“A reputation as a bit of a ladies’ man is no obstacle to success in French politics, indeed quite the reverse. A conviction for assault and attempted rape, however, is an altogether different matter,” Henley argued.
“He may now be brought low by a failing long recognised in France, if rarely discussed owing to the country’s draconian privacy laws,” he added.
Guardian colleague Angelique Chrisafis said the incident raised “the uncomfortable question in the French media and politics of two parallel worlds: what is printed, and what is behind it, gossip, and what must officially remain ‘unsaid’.”
Meanwhile, the staunchly conservative Daily Mail ran an opinion piece by Stephen Glover carrying the headline “A sexual satyr, a conspiracy of silence and why we must NEVER have privacy laws like France.”
“IN THE DOCK – IMF chief and France’s culture of secrecy”, the centre-right Times splashed across its front page.
Writing in the paper, Ben Macintyre mirrored the comments of his counterparts, perhaps revealing a desire in Britain to highlight the faults of French politics after being the butt of jokes about their own “uptight” morals.
“The British may be too prudish about sexual behaviour, but the Strauss-Kahn scandal shows that French fascination with political seducers may be at least equally misguided,” Macintyre said.
“Sexual behaviour is neither a matter for censure nor approval. The French are no more highly sexed than other nations, although they like to believe they are,” he claimed.
The historian said the incident was an “indictment of a macho, secretive French political culture that regards philandering as merely part of a long French tradition: Liberte, Egalite, Infidelite.”
Well, he’s not leaving himself much wiggle room.
It goes on and on, as BHL is wont to do. Before you take him too seriously, first note that it’s become more and more clear that this behavior isn’t all that shocking for Strauss-Kahn and, second, read this so you can understand that no one can take Bernard-Henri Levy as seriously as he takes himself.
Rayfire: ‘Credible’ is now defined as being able to create ‘incredible’ lies in favour of one’s masters. ‘Truthful’ is defined as being truthful to the cause of one’s masters to remain in power whatever the circumstances.
‘Judgment’ here is defined as being a judge with the consent of one’s masters and never pause for a moment to think for oneself. A credible judiciary system is now a myth as far as Malaysia is concerned.
Multi Racial: Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah said Saiful Bukhari Azlan “is credible and truthful”. That statement itself put doubt into Zabidin’s credibility and truthfulness.
Ketuanan Rakyat: What can we expect from an Umnoputra-controlled court? In fact, almost all Malaysians expected this decision from this judge, who thinks Saiful is credible. Can anyone go without going to the toilet or washing his dirty backside for days? This shows how dirty Umnoputras can go to in order to bring down Anwar Ibrahim.
Changeagent: I’m not sure if I would go as far to consider him a credible and truthful witness, but Saiful is definitely a very impressive illusionist. He can make consumed curry puffs and coffee disappear without a trace in his own bowel system.
In addition to that, he can also make half a football team’s DNA appear in his anus from just one alleged person’s semen. Try beating that, David Copperfield.
Azizi Khan: Saiful a credible witness? The man who didn’t wash his arse for days? Good going, judge.
Alan Goh: A day of mourning for rational Malaysians who still believe our justice system will issue fair judgments. If Saiful is a credible witness, so are the Datuk T trio, especially Shazryl Eskay Abdullah – the guy who lost the RM20 million crooked bridge suit and who later swore on the Quran in the mosque.
Since Anwar is asked to enter into his defence, the sex tape issue can temporarily be put on hold. One way or the other, Anwar will still have to go to jail for the second time until he is no longer a threat to Umno/BN.
Samuel Ng: Only those who are credible can ascertain another person’s credibility to the satisfaction of others. I don’t feel any satisfaction today.
Kgen: A person who claims he didn’t pass motion for two days just to “preserve evidence” and can’t decide whether he gave his ass forcibly or consensually is a truthful and credible witness? In that case, I have some valuable swampland to sell you.
AnonymousA: I have boycotted the Star since years ago, and now my Malaysiakini’s subscription is expiring soon. Every morning when I switched on the PC, reading all the injustices and all the nuisance about the country, my blood boils.
I may not want to renew Malaysiakini anymore. I have given up on this land. 1SexMalaysiaBoleh. Umno/BN, you win.
Anonymous: Prior to Burma’s 1990 general election, Aung San Suu Kyi was put under house arrest and not allowed to contest as a candidate. Still, her party NLD won more than 80 percent of the seats. There is no reason why Malaysians can’t do that. They can take away Anwar, but they can’t take away Malaysians’ aspirations for a better government.
Tan Teng Wah: When the judge said Mohd Saiful is a “credible and truthful witness”, he, in fact, has returned a verdict of ‘guilty’. Undoubtedly, Anwar will be fighting a losing battle in the kangaroo court.
Judge orders Anwar to enter defence
Pemerhati: Two quotes by judge Zabidin: First, “The incident did take place and it indeed was consensual.” Second, “Justice Zabidin mentions Saiful’s rectum being empty – the witness said he wanted to preserve evidence and he had not defecate for two days.”
From these two quotes it is clear that Zabidin knows that Saiful lied when he claimed that he was forcefully sodomised and when he claimed that he had not been to the toilet for two days. Yet he calls him a credible witness.
When you have a judge who comes to conclusions that defy simple logic and common sense and is able to conclude the very opposite of what the evidence clearly indicates, shows that the judge is either highly incompetent or has sold his soul to the devil and will do whatever the devil tells him.
Poppyie: It was testified that Saiful’s rectum was empty and a lengthy swab of 9 cm from the anus was used to extract Anwar’s semen, which already nestled in the bowel area.
Saiful also testified that he did not defecate for two days for reason that he wanted to preserve the priceless semen. Though Saiful had not defecated for two days, the bowel movement would have had pushed the waste to the entrance of his anus, and there was no way the rectum could be empty as testified.
Unless someone sucked out Saiful’s waste there was no way for the rectum to be empty and consequently allowing for a high swap to extract the semen already nestled in the bowel area as claimed.
Md Imraz Muhammed Ikhbal: Granted that the judge finds Saiful a credible, truthful and reliable witness but of certainty, the right thinking citizens of world undoubtedly find this pathetic excuse for judge totally incredible and deplorably deceptive but nevertheless admirably reliable when it comes to being a pawn of the ruling elites in advancing their gutter political agenda.
When judicial rulings no longer adhere to the precepts of logic and the interpretation of law no longer upholds the tenets of justice and morality, then that marks the demise of lawfulness of a state.
It shall be in disdain in time to come when we lament the pits of humiliation our justice system has descended into under the rule of a corrupt regime.
M’sia1st: Today is not a verdict of guilty or not. Today’s decision is whether there is prima facie, that’s all. Ada faham?
Pants on Fire: But calling for the defence is as good as a conviction. The onus will then shift to the accused to prove that he is not guilty. To me, one is assumed guilty the moment defence is called. Whatever happens is God’s will, and done for a purpose.
Ferdtan: Here is another Augustine Paul in making. Judge Augustine’s untimely death gives a sense of poetic justice for his sins on earth. The prayer calling for divine intervention is more than relevant. The verdict will be as expected: guilty as charged.
Another long trial awaits Anwar to keep him busy from the coming general election. The real trial will be by the rakyat’s court: Umno government is guilty as charged. Saiful is a shameless tool of a fiend. Judge Zabidin may go the same sorry way.
Chrispy: Sepandai-pandai tupai melompat akhirnya jatuh ke tanah jua. Jubah ugama yang di pakai untuk menyelubung kejahatan telah mula robak-rabek.
KSS: If anyone bothered watching Fareed Zakaria’s GPS on CNNyesterday, we would have realised how far away we are behind our tiny neighbour, Singapore, which is No 1 on the Global Transparency/Corruption Index – meaning they are the least corrupt nation in the world.
We are probably aiming for world-class status as being the pariah of the world – thanks to Umno and BN.
EugeneT: This whole sandiwara and the prosecutors’ charge reeks of inconsistency and doubts, and yet the judge claims Saiful is reliable and truthful? What are these imaginary dots the judge sees that we don’t?