///The winners:

4) The Najib government

The government wasted little time in crafting a statement hailing the acquittal as a kudos for the reforms proposed by the Najib administration and as proof of the independence of the judiciary.

Definitely, the administration will score points with fencesitters and foreign governments for not “interfering” with the case.

The administration could ride on the momentum and expect Prime Minister Najib Razak to use this court decision to beat the reform drum upon his return from South Africa this afternoon.///

The earliest loser is in fact the Abdullah government which allowed Sodomy II to be pursued and the mastermind of the dirty trick is none other than Najib. The proceedings right from how the person who was raped and thus according to Najib had a citizen’s right to due court process proved only that the AG utilized the convention to serve ‘public interest’ by charging one of the two parties for consensual sodomy. Unfortunately for Najib the 100 hours old sperms could not be accepted as to have retained its pristine characteristics. The key evidence was suspect. The judge at last has the self-esteem to accept that he would have done himself in had he followed the script entirely. Though Najib might gain the reputation that he had allowed the judge independence but the truth is the government has always made it difficult for judges to choose independence over obedience. In the present case, whatever Najib wishes, he had to deal with another human. Though absolute power corrupts absolutely, but at times even the king cannot make a cat to look at him.

The biggest loser of the case is Najib. But he considered the end justifies the means. Najib wanted to remove Anwar using rule by law, and trump up charges, but the perfect scheme was not a perfect crime.

The police was another loser. There were more important cases which it should have pursued, such as against the murderers of TBH, but it chose to give more value to Saiful Bukhari’s asshole.

The attorney general was most stupid. What public interest was the AG trying to protect when Sodomy was between two person? How did AG deter others from sodomy in publicizing the case when it is seen that sodomy is a worth while activity with scholarship, perhaps from the private purse of the most powerful person, and other unknown rewards thrown in.

The Sodomy case shows that Najib felt the threat of Anwar and he displayed his fear that he would not be able to beat Anwar in a free and fair election.

Najib could not finish what he started to do and had to accept that even with all the power he could not suppress justice all the time.

Najib is still a joke to leaders of other countries as the person who would use extra-political means to wipe out his political opponent. The world leaders are treated to the show of how Najib politicizes the apparatus of the state to remain in power. Malaysia suffers too because of Najib’s action.

The independence of the judiciary in the country depends on whether the judge in question chooses to be independent. The environment they work shows that independence was always a difficult choice, rather than a certainly that can be expected.

There cannot be any reform because the government is deformed.

Foreign governments are certain that the government interferes in the case in a cunning manner rather than blindly. They expect other non-sodomy cases against Anwar would surface, such as for making unclear police report.

///Only about 50 out of the 5,000 pledged supporters came to back the Saiful rally at the FT Mosque near the Jalan Duta court complex today.///–Malaysiakini

Saiful Bukhari was a ‘hero’ to have attracted 5,000 pledged supporters. What do they support Saiful for? His ability to partake in sodomy as the government claimed could be his only qualification. Clearly many are envious of his opportunity to have made use of his asshole to gain a scholarship and to be seen to have helped the prime minister to weed off his political opponent. So the court case did not deter the aspiration to perform such act. Sodomy to the 5,000 would be an accepted activity, if the rewards were good enough. Ironically, the Prime Minister himself had promoted sodomy in his interest to finish off his opponent.

The sodomy II was no doubt based on a police report made by Saiful Bukhari. Did Saiful tell the police that he was raped, or did he tell the police that he had a sodomy of mutual consent?

Najib said that Saiful Bukhari has a right to justice. a justice to avert what had wronged him. If Saiful got involved in consensual sodomy, then he would be lucky to escape prosecution. Yet Najib the prime minister should not be stupid not to realize the simple logic. For Najib to claim that Saiful had a right to justice, Najib had a basis to believe that Saiful was forced into action against his will. The Attorney General must have found that Saiful could not have been forced even if sodomy had taken place. Instead of charging Saiful for making false police report, the AG chose to selectively charge one of the two so-called partners in sodomy. Thus, sodomy II is selective prosecution which means persecution.

Saiful said that he might appeal. It is interesting that a witness to a criminal case assumes the status of a victim when the police and the AG were certain that his police report was inaccurate.

Sodomy has been an excuse for preventing a change of leaders to government since 1998. It is time that the archaic law be repealed.