Events in 1998-1999, even if true, are past. One needs to rake them up only if they are helpful to defend against accusations and charges. DSAI is however already a free man having obtained acquittal in 2004. The Lingam clip enquiry also established the judiciary bias against him at that point of time. So instead of seeking closure as far as that episode concerned and moving forward, why does he now rake past events up against the two highest law enforcement officers (IGP or AG) based allegedly on dossier in his possession?

One theory is to pre-emtively tarnish the legitimacy of entire administration of justice and law enforcement so that whatever arrest for charges that may be brought against him, even if supported by convincing evidence, will be rejected as illegitimate in the Court of Public Opinion.

Indirectly he is drawing a line in the sand – and asking supporters to follow as well – that law and the requirements of law need not be followed as their enforcement emanates from an illegitimate source.

To resist the law he seeks sanctuary in Turkish Embassy which is near enough to issue his orders for his struggle against the BN and yet far enough not to be arrested.

There is then a need to justify then why he seeks refuge ‘indefinitely’ in the Turkish Embassy, and the best reason is death threats and assassination and the convenience of explaining it on basis that PDRM could not protect him based on the line already drawn above. Frankly Raja Petra has more cause to hide in the Turkish Embassy but does not!

For Pakatan Rakyat and all who support PR, this poses a dilemma.

He may be encouraging all to take to the streets reformasi style on grounds that the law and its process are illegitimate.

This is a very dangerous course arguably not good for the nation.

It is different from the earlier course charted for Opposition after spectacular gains of 8th March – ie run the state governments properly and if possible canvass defections from BN’s side all within parameters of the law……

You may want to reflect why he raises the stakes and up the ante in another manner.

After all the Lingam Video clip enquiry has made many not believe in the charges brought against him in Dr Mahathir’s years. The political tsunami of 3rd March itself evinced that huge sections of people don’t believe in BN anymore.

In this milieu of widespread distrust by large sections of public in respect to whatever the BN claims, why should everything about the Opposition struggle instantly change (by police report lodged against IGP & AG, disclosure of death threats and seeking sanctuary in Turkish Embassy ie drawing a line in the sand against legitimacy of law) raising the spectre of political stand off and street confrontation with law enforcement authorities just because of some BN’s ‘mole’ lodging last Sat a police report, especially if were true, as DSAI would tell us and have us think, that the accusation is entirely baseless and fabricated? Where is the proof?

Where does Pakatan Ralyat go from here – the DAP & PAS in particular? We more or less know Parti KeAdilan Rakyat’s stand.

Malaysiakini has just reported that

(1) “PKR’s de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim this morning filed a defamation suit against his aide over claims of sodomy…In the suit which was filed at the Kuala Lumpur High Court registry in Jalan Duta, Anwar also claimed that the police report lodged by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan was an abuse of the process of law”.
(2) “Meanwhile the party also said that it had postponed its plans to lodge a police report against police chief Musa Hassan and attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail over their alleged misconduct during Anwar Ibrahim’s trials in 1998-1999.”

I am happy that wiser counsel prevails, I am in total agreement that the above (1) and (2) is the correct thing to do which re-directs PKR and its supporters away from the other course of direct confrontation against law enforcement.

Malaysiakini further reported Anwar said “I need categorical assurance on my safety. Sure, if they give me an assurance for my safety today I will leave the embassy today…!”

This is the best & wisest and correct thing Anwar ever said in these few days.

There is no business on part of PDRM not to give such an assurance, and for sake of the country, it should straightaway give the assurance to pave the way for Anwar to retract and leave the embassy. Esp so when Party KeAdilan Rakyat had also said that it had postponed its plans to lodge a police report against IGP & AG over their alleged misconduct during Anwar Ibrahim’s trials in 1998-1999.

This will bring matters back to normalcy, the situation before Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan lodged report.

Since the contents of report are according to Anwar fabricated and untrue why over react?

Anwar is absolutely right to back track on and reverse on 2 steps taken earlier in the immediate wake of Saiful’s report:-

1. to lodge report against IGP/AG on events way past in 1998/99 of which closure already obtained by his 2004 acquittal;

2. seeking refuge in Turkish Embassy ostensibly on grounds of threats to his life.

This is because 1. & 2. draw a line in the sand against legitimacy of law enforcement which will bring PR supporters eventually to point of standoff and confrontation with forces of law enforcement reformasi style, breaking the peace.

Secondly if Saiful’s allegations were a fabrication without basis, as Anwar says they are, then a simple defamation/libel suit in accordance with law will suffice to discredit it, there being no need for Anwar to raise the stakes for a standoff and up-the-ante by 1. and 2.

Otherwise the unnecessary pursuing of 1. and 2. in response to Saiful’s allegations will constitute an over reaction on Anwar’s part disproportionate to the gravity of the situation that the lodgment of a ‘fabricated’ report poses which will most definitely achieve opposite effect of lending credence to Saiful’s allegations and the negative inference drawn against Anwar himself of probable guilt.

Thus Anwar’s reversal of his initial over-reaction in 1. and 2. will bring matters back to normalcy and not affect Pakatan Rakyat’s continued struggle (within parameters of the law of running the state govt and canvassing for lawful crossovers), which otherwise will most severely be compromised, if it leads to street fighting and giving justification of ban of the Opposition parties.

People should have some decency even in dirty politics. Bring up Criminal Breach of Trust (CBT) as in cheating public monies or cheating on electoral rules or even murder as a benchmark as to whether to disqualify a person as fit and proper to hold public office. Don’t resort to innuendoes and allegations, true or not true, about political opponent’s personal and private sexual lives, whether active or passive, regular or deviant, what has that got to do with his vision and capability as a political leader??? It is only a sex obessesed and also likely repressed society that pays disproportionate interest on such issues like sex, a natural biological imperative, and make it a big thing.

Malaysiakini correspondent (Jimadie Shah Osman) reported this piece on Jun 30th –

(Quote) “ PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim had been forewarned and was asked to be careful when taking in 23-year-old Saiful Bukhari Azlan as a staff, according to a party source. However, Anwar ignored the warning …He (Anwar) was told to be careful of the individual due to his suspicious background when he joined the office administration,” said the source. The same ‘warnings’ had been given to other party leaders after Saiful had became close to Anwar and the staff at his office following the March 8 general elections.

“I have also given addresses of several blogs discussing the boy (Saiful). I’m not sure if he (Anwar) read them or not,” said the source.

According to the source, Anwar did not reply to the particular email detailing the blogs.

Malaysiakini has been made to understand that two-weeks ago, Anwar had asked another aide to persuade the source concerned to retract a posting cynical of Saiful on his blog”.

(Unquote)

That is correct. By standards of legal criteria, if the then Judiciary had been independent, Anwar ought to have been found, in law, not guilty of sodomy (instead of otherwise).

As undergrad2 said in the other thread, the question of whether he was really someone inclined “that way” or not is irrelevant – and I certaintly won’t want to prejudge or comment on that – but as a matter of law, he should have been and was entitled to be acquitted . There is also no doubt whatsoever that it was a clear case of political persecution by TDM under a judicial system that was not independent (Lingam Enquiry refers). (And Anwar was the only one against whom such a crime of unatural sex under Penal code was, in recent memory invoked).

Yes a person (1) completely heterosexual can be falsely convicted as guilty by a Kangaroo court when there is political persecution in way no different than (2) one who could be also actually (say) a homosexual or bisexual as alleged by prosecution.

When due process of law is not followed, when judges are obviously partial, when evidence is slipshod and contaminated, confessions extracted from coercion, dates of alleged offence are mixed up, prosecution witnesess gave unreliable testimonies either because they’re lying or plain confused by accused’s ‘dream team of clever lawyers, then who ever charged by the state for the offence of sodomy – whether he belongs to category (1) or (2) above – is entitled to a complete acquittal because the standard of beyond reasonable doubt necessary for “legal guilt” has not been established. To do otherwise is travesty of justice.

Necessarily the fact that no “legal guilt” should be found in above set of circumstances cannot prejudge the separate issue whether a person is actually heterosexual, homosexual or just in between ie bi-sexual at all times or siometimes etc. Only close associates will know better.

Don’t forget if prosecution were conducted in a manner botched as stated above and there is aparent travesty of justice, even if a person had really committed sodomy, no reasonable man looking from the outside at the bias way the judicial system works, will believe it!

Don’t get me wrong : I am not commenting one way or another on Anwar’s predilection on matters of private sex.

It is not my business and frankly I don’t have any personal knowledge and I don’t care to speculate, though I think to be fair to him he is entitled to be presumed to be like the rest of majority of us ie. a person of heterosexual inclination.

But just so that it is clear – even if he were (hypothetically) otherwise [ie (say) a closet “bi” and hypocritical about it, I (speaking for myself only with no expectation that others follow suit) can find no great fault about that – given, a society where the majority always think negatively of and marginalise persons of different or (to them) deviant sexual behaviour.

I know many gay friends of both sexes, and other than their different sexual preferences, are otherwise very normal people, and we should not draw a connection to link their sexual predilection with their other morals as a person much less capability as a leader.

The caveat is that I am not particularly religious because if I were otherwise, then I may not take such a view.

Undergrad2,

Well sometimes it is an ‘acquired taste’. I have not had the opportunity in formative years to attend and savour boarding life in a certain eminent educational institution with pseudo Greco-Roman architecture in front of a rugby field that has supposedly produced many political and corporate earth shakers, where, according to “reliable” anecdotal evidence (some of it hearsay but some recounting of personal experience) after a rugby match, some of these naughty boys thought it was ‘British tradition’ (I wonder wherever they got this idea?) for the winning side to demand from the opposite losing side a ‘trophy’ and the losing side ‘sacrificed’ the one who then happened to look a trifle effeminate, albeit gawky with thin lanky legs for the sacrifice! What started as experimentation in such innocuous ways by some curious young boys was discarded by most in their later maturer years, whilst a very few others never quite got rid of what they learned. :)

On 30th June Peace Hill police forensic team of 15 visited Unit 1151 of Kondominium Desa Damansara in Kuala Lumpur (a luxury condominium in Damansara said to be worth RM2.2 million) at about 12.15pm, spent more than five hours sweeping through the unit.
A separate team of investigators were also at the condominium guard house, inspecting the log books, interviewing security guards and going through hours of CCTV footages.

No one alleges nor was it ever reported that the luxurious Condominium Unit 1151 of Kondominium Desa Damansara worth RM2.2 million and its rental rates range between RM7, 500 to RM15, 000 belonged to complainant Mohd Saiful. It could be used without belonging to him.
The forensic team swooped in there because the alleged incidence of sodomy was supposed to have taken place there. Of course they would also check who the owner is and whether he/it is related to any principal parties involved in the on-going investigations to avail use of the apartment.

The United States said today it would oppose any politically motivated investigation or prosecution of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim facing fresh sex misconduct charges – Malaysiakini’s report Jul 1, 08.

Tom Casey, spokesman for the US State Department said, “certainly, we would be concerned that anything that is done be done in a way that is appropriate, that is a legitimate investigation of charges that might exist under Malaysian law, and would not be anything that was a politically-motivated investigation or prosecution.”

The country’s international image is down the pits in the wake of international news (CNN & the like) of the Altantuya Shaaribuu murder case – and now this “potentially” another repeat sodomy case all having some association with Malaysian politics.

What do you think the world would think of us? From Third to Fourth World!

To ensure impartiality of investigations, the government should solicit assistance of the FBI and/or Scotland Yard to assist in forensics.

It is good for all parties. Any other way will not be convincing before the Court of Public Opinion, a large segment of which has already lost confidence in administration of criminal justice (whether or not such an opinion holds in all cases).

We have a big problem here with Sections 377A and 377B of the Penal Code (a relic of colonial rulers) that criminalize any person having “sexual relations with another involving the introduction of the penis into the anus or mouth” can be jailed up to 20 years and is also liable for whipping.

In a recent International Herald Tribune interview, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said: “China has already allowed and recognised gays, so have Hong Kong and Taiwan. It’s a matter of time. But in Singapore they have so far de-criminalized oral sex (and possibly anal one between heterosexual but not between same sex).

Even here the Bar Council has advocated decriminalizing oral sex between consensual adults but held back on anal sex.

Large segments of our society are conservative and religious, so decriminalization is, I expect, eons away.

Meanwhile this imposes a tremendous and onerous problem on the sizeable minority gay population here. They are marginalized and oppressed by the heterosexual majority. They better emigrate to more tolerant cultures but they cannot since they have neither money nor skills required by host countries.

There is no problem to closet gays where it is consensual but the moment, as what lupus said, any partner is unrequited as to his affections and become vengeful, the other becomes immediately open to black mail especially the latter is a person of reputation and public importance. (Gays are like hetrosexuals prone to same feelings of jealousy, disappointment and betrayal but the difference in gays’ case is the potential intensity of black mail by the other partner. It is derived not just from allegation of “force” but from the mere public disclosure of the relationship considered illicit by larger society).

The larger society does not accept at all gays – or that they have right to exist and if they do, they rightly belong behind bars under Sections 377A and 377B of the Penal Code.

What a terrible & inhumane thing such attitudes of the majority!

“Did he frame himself?” is not what Ong Kian Ming & Oon Yeoh asked. It was just a sub title to their article, inserted via cut & paste.

Like he is going (preemptively) for broke, trying to instigate his own arrest.

After recent anti govt rally of 10,000 people in Stadium Malawati in Shah Alam, Anwar also revealed that he will be going on a nationwide roadshow to explain himself to the people and before departing, he reminded the crowd of the “One Million” protest at Padang Timur, Petaling Jaya on this coming Sunday.

Now investigations have not yet been completed and he has not been charged for any offence yet.

It is obvious that he is by way of pre-emption stirring Reformasi style public gathering demonstrations of which he calculates there are 2 possible outcomes, either which he is going to triumph given the circumstances.

First scenario : government clamps down to restore order in the streets. This would be reminiscent of what happened in Dr Mahathir’s administration and the rakyat will be able to draw the same conclusion of what happened then is happening now – in his favour;

Second scenario: the government does not react. In such a case the demonstrations would grow and could topple the government ala Manila (Marcos), Bangkok (Thaksin) and Jakarta (Suharto) fashion before any sodomy charge could run its course – also in his favour.

Either way he calculates heads he wins, tails the government loses.