By Kee Thuan Chye | Jan 9, 2012 Malaysiakini
Anwar Ibrahim is free! Many people did not expect he would be acquitted by the High Court judge presiding over his Sodomy II trial.
In fact, the situation looked dire for Anwar when the judge ruled in May that Anwar’s alleged victim, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, was a truthful and credible witness.
But now the judge feels that Saiful’s testimony is not enough to convict Anwar (left) because it is uncorroborated. More important to the judge is his uncertainty about the integrity of the DNA samples, and that is his main reason for acquitting Anwar.
Does this mean that the episode is over? No. The government can still appeal. And who knows what the outcome of the appeal might be?
I would say, however, that the government should not appeal. This would drag the case on and on again, and it’s already drained such a lot of resources – the rakyat’s money, the rakyat’s emotions – and tarnished the country’s image. The man himself has already gone through a virtual hell. Not to mention as well his having suffered the sex video allegations of the Datuk T trio. A lesser man might have crumbled.
I think it’s best to let things be. The verdict has been made, it’s time to move on. Even Saiful (left) has accepted the verdict.
Sadly for the judge, Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah, because there is now so little faith and belief in the independence of the judiciary, the jury is still out as to whether he is “a Daniel come to judgement” or a lackey acting on instructions from the Executive.
With so much political stake invested in this one case, the public perception was that the Executive might interfere. After all, a guilty verdict could have given Pakatan Rakyat sympathy votes at the next general election.
But now, with the judge letting Anwar go, on basically a technical point, i.e. the unreliability of the DNA samples, an element of doubt remains as to whether the sodomy did not take place.
Of course, those who believe that it did not will continue to believe that, even if Anwar had been found guilty. But among the fence-sitters, this doubt might niggle them.
More willing to become friends
A free Anwar would have numerous positive things going for Pakatan Rakyat, the coalition he leads. He can concentrate now on the mission of winning Putrajaya. Much work would be needed on getting enough seats in Sabah and Sarawak.
Perhaps foes might now be more willing to become friends, and others might be more willing to jump on his bandwagon. This is the time to go all out to exploit the possibilities.
It would seem the cards are now stacked against Prime Minister Najib Razak and Barisan Nasional (BN).
While people may acknowledge that Anwar’s acquittal does not amount to outright attestation that he had no sexual dalliance with Saiful, they may still perceive that Najib had some involvement in the case because Saiful met with him a few days before he made the police report.
Najib, who was deputy prime minister then, has admitted that until that meeting, he had not known Saiful, but questions will always be asked as to why Saiful approached specifically Najib to tell him about the alleged sodomy.
This connection may cause some to think that the acquittal, if it was independently decided, is a letdown for Najib.
Another worry for Najib is the support Anwar got outside the High Court in the so-called 901 rally to respond to the verdict.
The presence of about 7,000 supporters was an indication that the leader is still relevant, in contrast to the pronouncements of critics who say he is fading off.
Although the numbers at the rally did not add up to 100,000, as pledged by PKR deputy president Azmin Ali a few days before, it ultimately did not matter.
The message it sent out was clear. The police standing by did nothing to enforce the 10 conditions they had set; the protestors brought banners and chanted nonetheless, and Pakatan leaders and others made speeches.
I suppose when you have the rakyat on your side and the public sentiment is clear, the police would be loath to touch you for fear of the backlash.
In any case, the conditions were ridiculous; what sort of rally would it be if banners, chanting and speeches were disallowed? What would the protestors do? Stand around and chat, bury their noses in their mobile phones and perspire in the heat?
Bill’s provisions are ‘rubbish’
So the organisers did right to ignore those conditions. Besides, the day before the rally, the police looked like nothing more than whining school prefects, griping about the need to follow the conditions and calling the organisers “liars” for saying they were never discussed at the negotiations.
The 901 rally was the first major one since the passing of the Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011. But already we can see that its provisions are rubbish.
First, under this bill, you don’t need a permit from the police any more to stage a gathering, which must therefore mean you don’t need their approval. And yet for the 901 rally, the language used by the police indicated that they were giving approval.
Worse, apart from setting conditions, the police effectively restricted the numbers that could attend the rally.
The Inspector-General of Police (IGP) said the car park of the court complex was the only place protestors could gather – anywhere else would be considered illegal – so once it was filled, latecomers would be turned away.
And since, as he said, the car park could accommodate only 5,000 people, that set a maximum number for the protestors. The only way to accommodate thousands more would have been for the protestors to climb on the shoulders of their colleagues or better still form human pyramids all over the car park!
As it turned out, however, the IGP’s estimation was way off the mark. The car park could accommodate at least double the 5,000 he projected. Was he underestimating the capacity to discourage people from attending?
The real point is, how can the police restrict the number of people who want to attend? If the space was not big enough, let the people spill onto adjacent areas. Why declare other areas outside the car park illegal for the rally?
This new development is even worse than before the Peaceful Assembly Bill came into force. The police have even more power now.
Is it any wonder then that there are still manifestations of resistance against the bill? The most consistent of these is the ‘Kill the Bill’ campaign that brings dissenters together every Saturday at the Kuala Lumpur City Centre to voice their cause.
This is indeed a bill that needs to be killed because it is actually imposing more restrictions than ever before. And it deceives the people into believing that there is no need to seek approval from the police for a gathering when in fact the police can still stop any gathering if they wish to.
They did not stop the 901 rally because they said they were keeping to “the spirit of the Peaceful Assembly Bill”. I wish the police – and government ministers – would stop saying this. My reason is simple. It sounds like pure bullshit. ________ KEE THUAN CHYE is the author of the book No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians, which is scheduled for release soon.