First of all the law against sodomy (section 377 of Penal Code) is relic of British colonial laws inherited from Victorian England based on premise that sex must lead to procreation not recreation and even if recreation tantamount to great sin when indulged in between persons of same sex!

Now that is not a very intelligent law. Like it not (based on anecdotal observation) there are homosexuals and lesbians in our midst. What’s the reasons for this condition – genetic causes, biological aberration, hormonal imbalance in the womb, upbringing, acquired taste, domineering mother-weak or distant father – who knows???

So there’s a first question whether we should still have such a law to persecute this class of people (homosexual). It is arguably in breach of the UN Human Rights Committee’s ruling that discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation is a violation of human rights.

Secondly such a law is also not gender equal: sodomy between male parties is an offence whilst lesbianism seem to be excluded!

Thirdly what’s good in maintaining such a law when its enforcement is not active in relation to general populace and periodically selective in the public eyes when it implicates a prominent politician from the Opposition side?

This where Kit asks Hamid whether he has nothing else better to do when the City is threatened by all kinds of vicious crimes that require allocation of the state’s resources….

However, again, if contrary to good sense, one still wants to persist in investigating a citizen for the offence, investigations should at least be seen conducted fairly based on some factual or reasonable basis of possible success.

Here we’re talking about forcible sodomy or anal rape. Any such prosecution must prove 2 ingredients, if it is to have any hope of success – (a) penetration (sodomy) and (b) non consensual ie force.

At the onset and relating to (a), first medical examination at 2pm at Hospital Pusrawi (leaked) already ruled out any signs of sodomy. There is also a high possibility that the second examination conducted 4 hours in different (govt) general hospital would have come to same conclusion.

If it were otherwise, those who wish Anwar harm would have countered in media the exculpatory findings of Pusrawi hospital by publication of the incriminatory findings of the subsequent govt hospital…..

If ingredient (a) is remote to be proven, ingredient (b) is even harder. Can’t imagine someone (younger + stronger) following a more elderly person to some private condo and then crying rape and in the aftermath appearing very composed as first recorded in examination by Dr Mohamed Pusrawi.

The point here is that in the wake of these evidential weakness in respect of the specific complaint, it would be ordinary to slow down if not drop active investigation (as what Karpal Singh suggested) but contrary to this, investigation seemed to persist, to look for fresh leads, or at least it seems that way……

Now besides misallocation of state resources, the public may perceive that this smacks of special targeting which is not right from perspective of Rule of law, basic citizen’s rights against selective application of law enforcement.

No one – and not prejudging the separate issue whether the person investigated is actually heterosexual, homosexual, sodomite or whatever – should be subject to continuance of such ‘active’ investigations when lack of evidence of the basic ingredients of a charge right in the beginning to back the complaint would have justified a halt if not a winding down of such investigations.