Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General.
The man who is the real mastermind behind this latest conspiracy to frame Anwar is Shafee Abdullah. Just days before the sodomy allegation exploded, and even before Saiful’s meeting with Rodwan on 25 June 2008, Shafee was in Najib’s house to attend a gathering. And in front of scores of witnesses he asked to be excused early because he ‘had a very big fish to catch’. Shafee conveniently made it known that he is behind the move to catch the ‘big fish’ and he wanted all those in Najib’s house to be aware that Najib was in the know. Actually, Najib did not know what he was talking about and assumed that the ‘big fish’ meant Raja Petra Kamarudin and was with regards to the Statutory Declaration that he had signed just days earlier on 18 June 2008.
Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General. When word got out that he is heading the special police operations centre, which was located in his office, they had to abandon the whole idea.
Shafee’s hands are behind the whole thing. And this can only happen with Abdullah’s blessing. No, it is not Mahathir who is behind this. And it is not Abdullah, Najib and Anwar who are the three victims. The victims are Mahathir, Najib and Anwar. Abdullah is the hidden hand and Shafee is the henchman who was tasked with the job of implementing the evil deed. Politics is not what it always appears to be in Malaysia. That is how Malay politics is played out.
Source: Malaysia Today
Karpal urged trial judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah to issue a show-cause notice to Muhammad Shafee to explain the latter’s “unwarranted public attack” against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s defence statement from the dock.
Anwar, a former deputy prime minister, now heads the three-party opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact. Besides being his political ally, Karpal is defending the PKR advisor who stands accused of sodomising a former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, three years ago in a luxury condominium here.
“If what was uttered by Anwar was contemptuous, it would have been contempt in the face of the court. It was for Justice Mohamad Zabidin to hold Anwar in contempt. He did not do so.
“Who is Muhammad Shafee Abdullah to question the wisdom of the trial judge?” Karpal demanded in a media statement today.
Muhammad Shafee, among Malaysia’s legal elites, is regarded as an expert on media contempt laws and was cited yesterday in Umno-owned Mingguan Malaysia calling Anwar’s defence statement as contemptuous.
The top-earning lawyer was reported telling the Attorney-General to step into the row and initiate contempt proceedings against Anwar.
The news was replicated today in other mainstream media, including New Straits Times, which quoted Muhammad Shafee as saying: “This will also prevent the presiding judge from being involved in any possible conflict in which the judge may be blinded by it.”
Karpal objected to Muhammad Shafee’s argument for the A-G’s intervention as unprecedented and defying logic.
“That itself amounts to contempt of court on the part of the judge who does so,” he said.
“Shafee should know a judge cannot interfere in a judicial proceeding in another court. It is axiomatic. It is elementary,” the Bukit Gelugor MP added.
Muhammad Shafee has also come under fire online after Anwar’s unsworn statement of defence from the dock, purportedly for interfering with the news coverage of the controversial court case by issuing certain instructions to mainstream media editors and reporters.
How long more are the UMNO “”dogs””(as referred by Jalil Hamid himself ) going to let themselves whore for handouts time to time. Egypt’s former Security Min Habib el-Adly should be able to instill some wise thoughts for their survival as political prostitutes. How much is enough
No wonder the eerie silence of that Ib Ali on the 9th.
BE AFRAID!!!!! ALL YOU THUGGISH BASTARDS WHO ARE OUT TO DESTROY THE NATION
Attached please find the guidance/messaging on the Bersih issue for your attention and action, where necessary.
This follows the UMNO Political Bureau meeting where this issue was also discussed and that this material be circulated to all bureau members.
Please note that the usual confidentiality rule applies.
Please do not forward or disseminate it to unauthorised person/persons.
Thank you and best regards
Head, National Communications Team, PMO
GUIDANCE ON KEY ISSUES No 8/2011
Issue: BERSIH 2.0
By most accounts, the Bersih 2.0 protest on July 9 could turn out to be massive and will certainly go beyond issues of fair and free elections. With over 100 political, NGO and right groups could be joining the “March for Democracy”, we expect them to champion a slew of issues ranging from inflation to Teoh Beng Hock and Lynas. The protest, if not countered, could undermine the government, the economy and national security. This note sets out the policy guidance and the do’s and don’ts in managing the issue.
The process of mind-conditioning will continue in the run-up to July 9. The process will include:
1. Discredit the organisation and its key leaders. Bersih is neither registered with ROS nor ROC. It is NOT an election watchdog but a group of politicians and politically inclined individuals who lack credibility.
2. Label the rally as “perhimpunan haram” or “illegal assembly”, and that the people behind Bersih are trouble shooters and going against the Constitution and the law to gain political mileage.
3. That they are just a front for the opposition.
4. Since DSAI is already “out of the race” for premiership, he has to resort to street protests because PR can’t win GE13 through ballot boxes. He is seeking a “short-cut” to Putrajaya via undemocratic and unconstitutional means. Remind people about his Sept 16 bluff.
5. DSAI is also using this to shift the public attention away from his legal and moral woes.
6. Create anxiety that Bersih is working for the interests of foreign elements, who are out to destabilise the country.
7. That BERSIH is not bersih (clean) after all as it is an illegal group out to create havoc.
Do’s and Don’ts
1. KDN Minister, IGP, DIG and Internal Security and Public Order Director to brief media editors at KDN. Use the meeting to reinforce the branding as “perhimpunan haram”, that Bersih is an unlawful organisation and the perpetrators are out to create chaos.
2. KDN, which has jurisdiction over all print media, needs to exert its authority in ensuring the press toe the line.
3. Confine politicians to just making political statements. Let the police do their job.
4. PDRM can start calling up Bersih organisers based on the hundreds of police reports lodged so far.
5. Encourage the use of 3rd party validators.
6. Pre-empt chaos and disorder (fear paradigm). The “show of force” by UMNO or silat groups well before July 9 may be imperative to deter demonstrators.
7. The soundbytes in our favour MUST come from across the country and across the ethnic lines. The soundbytes should not just be confined to the Malays or those residing in the Klang Valley.
8. We must not allow the rally to be exploited by international elements.
9. As a pre-emptive measure, the authorities should stop the launch of Perhimpunan Bersih 2.0 scheduled for 19 June at the Chinese Assembly Hall. Likewise, a related Perkasa event called “Lawan Perhimpunan Bersih” at the Sultan Sulaiman Club on the same day should also be halted.
10. SPR should counter Bersih demands for free and fair elections by highlighting the various initiatives it has undertaken so far. Use the highly successful Sarawak PRN as its model. It should not meet up with Bersih people.
Recommended media treatment
1. Media to highlight stories of how businesses, retailers, tourists, shoppers, motorists and ordinary people will be affected. (July is the peak month for Arab tourist arrivals; plus the top three EPL teams will also be in town in July). Malaysia will be in bad light if the teams skip KL on security grounds.
2. Question the source of funding for Bersih.
3. The media will primarily be targeting the trio: DSAI (who is capitalising on this ahead of his July 15 Sodomy 2 trial), the newly minted PAS deputy chief Mat Sabu (who is the budak suruhan DSAI and tali barut DAP) and Ambiga.
4. We will encourage the media to use file photos of Ambiga with PR leaders to highlight her close association with them. Ambiga has the history of leading street protests when she was Bar Council president.
5. The media to use less of the same old faces (eg Zul Nordin, Zahrain, Ibrahim Ali) as “attack dogs.” Try to tap fresh faces (eg BN Youth leaders, some NGOs).
6. Friendly bloggers and cybertroopers will continue to be mobilised.
7. TV stations to constantly play up images of ugly demos in other countries.
Malaysia’s Flipflop History Conflicting Testimony Witness Gives What is clear in the scandal is the bastardization and prostitution of justice in this country.
Malaysia’s best-paid lawyer has denied conspiring with staff in the Prime Minister’s Office to subvert the media and end the political career of the man once deemed the biggest threat to the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN).
Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has called on the High Court hearing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial to haul up lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah over allegations that he conspired with the Najib administration to destroy the opposition leader’s image.
Opposition lawmakers told The Malaysian Insider that the court must find out if the prominent lawyer had met media chiefs along with staff from the Prime Minister’s Office to subvert media coverage of the high-profile trial.
“This raises doubt over the proceedings of the case and the court should call on Shafee to explain to ensure the credibility of the trial,” said PAS vice-president Datuk Mahfuz Omar(picture).
This was echoed by Perak DAP chief Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham, who said that as Shafee is frequently employed by and linked to backroom discussions with Barisan Nasional (BN) lynchpin Umno, he cannot be considered a neutral party.
“Justice must be seen to be served. This was also the lawyer who said openly to the media that it was 99.9 per cent sure that Anwar was the man in a sex video,” the Beruas MP said, referring to allegations earlier this year that the PKR de facto leader was the man recorded having sex with an unknown woman.
With Anwar’s ongoing sodomy trial winding to a close, the Permatang Pauh MP had given his statement from the dock, claiming that the accusation, which surfaced over three years ago, was a conspiracy by Datuk Seri Najib Razak to end his political career.
Muhammad Shafee has come under scrutiny online purportedly for interfering with the news coverage of the controversial court case by issuing instructions to mainstream media editors and reporters over their reporting of Anwar’s statement.
The alleged conspiracy was given more flavour by a blogger calling himself Ahmat Gaza who claimed that a clandestine meeting on August 23 at the swanky Le Meridien Hotel in the city here included one of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s media advisers, Abdul Jalil Hamid.
But the lawyer scoffed at the allegations, stating that the meeting with various media such asUtusan Malaysia, TV3 and The Star was not a secret and he was there to talk about the law of contempt.
Asked if Abdul Jalil was also present at that meeting, Muhammad Shafee said: “If Jalil was there, I vaguely think he was there, I’m not surprised if Jalil was there because he was there as a media person.”
He also admitted that he had commented on Anwar’s case, but defended his cutting remarks about the opposition leader’s statement from the dock as merely his opinion to illustrate what is contemptuous law because people had asked him about it with regards to the case.
“Why is Anwar relevant? Of course people want to know because it is the most controversial case going on right now,” he said.
Judge part of conspiracy to frame Anwar
Did the conspiracy to frame Anwar Ibrahim on trumped-up charges extend higher than the Attorney-General and Public Prosecutors? Did it also involve the Trial Judge as well?
If, in the beginning, these were just suspicions, today, we can safely say that the Trial Judge was certainly part of the conspiracy, maybe even the most important component in that gang of slime balls.
What was revealed via Anwar Ibrahim’s latest Affidavit filed in the Federal Court on Friday, 14 March 2003, is most interesting. This Affidavit contains copies of three letters that a prominent lawyer,Manjeet Singh Dhillon, wrote – one addressed to the recently-retired Chief Justice.
If – and I repeat “IF” – up to now the claim that Anwar Ibrahim is a victim of a frame-up was but a mere allegation, this new Affidavit and its three attachments now prove it beyond any shadow of doubt.
Little wonder the court panicked and decided to postpone Anwar’s Judicial Review scheduled for yesterday. Officially, they need more time to “find two more judges”. Word from our contacts in court, however, is they need more time to study this Affidavit.
The truth is, they probably need more time to confer with the Acting Prime Minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, or look for Dr Mahathir Mahathir Mohamad who is holidaying somewhere around the world to obtain further instructions on how to conduct a “damage control” exercise.
Those who know how the corrupt Malaysian judiciary works (the best money can buy) say this new and most damaging piece of evidence is not going to change anything. They have already written the judgment before even sitting down to hear the case.
This may be so as far as the legal aspects of the case is concerned. But it is not so easy as far as the “political fallout” is concerned. In the end, the powers-that-be will still have to face the voters come next election and the “court of public opinion” might not concur with how the court rules.
Remember, in an open hearing, the public is allowed to witness the proceedings and, for sure, what transpires will be widely reported all over the world.
However, there are a few things they can do to “soften” the blow:
1) Refuse to allow this new Affidavit to be admitted into the hearing. Therefore no one will know about it.
2) Hold the Judicial Review the day the US attacks Iraq. Then the whole world’s focus will be on the US-Iraq war and no one will pay attention to the Anwar trial.
3) Hold the Judicial Review for just five minutes, say that the court has considered the application for a Judicial Review and has found that there are no grounds for one, and then adjourn without further discussion.
The betting counter is now open. Which plan do you think they will adopt?
“It has been brought to my knowledge that, on the 26th of February 2003, one of my counsels, ZainurZakaria, faxed copies of letters he received from Manjeet Singh Dhillon to Christopher Fernando (another of Anwar’s counsels),” said Anwar in his 14 March 2003 Affidavit.
“The letter sent to Zainur Zakaria contained an enclosure which is a letter written by Manjeet SinghDhillon to the Chief Justice (the recently retired one) where Manjeet Singh Dhillon made a formal complaint against Justice Augustine Paul (the trial judge) for improper conduct in the Zainur Zakariacase which occurred during my trial.”
“These two letters were faxed to Fernando as he is my lead counsel in my upcoming appeal (the second, sodomy, conviction) before the Court of Appeal beginning on the 24th of March, 2003, and obviously also because what is stated in those letters affect me and the trial process I was subjected to.”
“This evidence was not available to me during my trial and this evidence is relevant to my case. Such evidence is credible and believable coming from a witness who is a senior and respected Advocate and Solicitor and a former Chairman of the Bar Council. Last but not least, this evidence would have had a decidedly important influence on the outcome of my case.”
Anwar then relates what transpired that would make this incident crucial to his case:
“Manjeet Singh Dhillon was requested by Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah (the Attorney-General then who has been in a comma since the last few months) to see him before proceedings for the proposed contempt proceedings against himself and Zainur Zakaria began that morning.”
“The request was made through Manjeet’s counsel, Jagjeet Singh.”
“Manjeet reluctantly agreed and met with Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah. They met at the anteroom at the courthouse in the presence of Datuk Abdul Gani Patail (the Public Prosecutor), Datuk Azhar Mohamad (another of the Prosecutors), and Jagjeet Singh.”
“Upon seeing Manjeet, Tan Sri Mohtar went up and hugged him and turned around and told Abdul Ganiand Azhar that Manjeet was an altruist and apologized to Manjeet for not having done anything on his letter in which he had leveled accusations against the two Prosecutors.”
“Tan Sri Mohtar added that he had not as yet taken this matter up with his officers.”
“Manjeet responded by reminding Tan Sri Mohtar that he had made very serious allegations against his officers and had written to him expecting something to be done but that nothing had been done.”
This letter that they are talking about is the complaint Manjeet sent Tan Sri Mohtar regarding AbdulGani and Azhar attempting to extort fabricated evidence from his (Manjeet’s) client Datuk NallaKaruppan to be used against Anwar in exchange for Nalla’s life.
“Tan Sri Mohtar did not deny or refute Manjeet’s allegations against his officers and both Abdul Ganiand Azhar remained silent.”
Though faced with the prospect of a death sentence if he does not “cooperate”, in September 1998, Datuk Nalla Karuppan made a signed statement denying that Anwar was involved in any sexual improprieties.
During the course of Anwar’s trial, Manjeet and Zainur brought this matter to the attention of the court. However, instead of acting on the information, the judge, Augustine Paul, asked the two lawyers to withdraw the allegation and apologise or else he would hold them in contempt.
When Zainur refused to do so, this angered the judge and, in a move that shocked the entire legal fraternity, he cited Zainur for contempt and sentenced him to three months jail; a most unusual and perplexing move indeed.
“This unusual attitude of the trial court had effectively deprived me of the opportunity of exposing an evil plot against me to secure my conviction by devious means, perpetrated by none other than the two main prosecutors in my case, one of whom is now the Attorney General,” argued Anwar.
Zainur Zakaria subsequently appealed against his contempt conviction and three-month sentence and the Federal Court acquitted him on grounds that there was indeed an attempt to fabricate evidence against Anwar and that Zainur was right in bringing it up.
The question now one needs to ask is, if Zainur was right in bringing this matter up as it was true, how would this affect Anwar’s guilty verdict which, therefore, was obtained based on fabricated evidence?