Posts Tagged ‘Sodomy II


Dr M has no objection to Anwar becoming PM

Father of modern Malaysia backs jailed former deputy in attempt to oust PM

Mahathir Mohamad says former deputy Anwar Ibrahimm, jailed on charges of sodomy, should be freed to contest election against scandal-ridden Najib

Father of modern Malaysia backs jailed former deputy in attempt to oust PM
6 July 2017 – The Guardian

Dr M


The Very Strange Case Of Special Prosecutor

‘Independent Individual’? The Very Strange Case Of Special Prosecutor Shafee Abdullah

Sarawak Report has invited lawyer Shafee Abdullah to explain the very large personal payments made to him by Prime Minister Najib Razak out of money stolen from 1MDB totalling RM9.5 million.

Task Force investigation documents show that the second payment of RM5.3 million was paid just a fortnight before the Appeal Court over-turned an earlier High Court acquittal of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on charges of sodomy. In an unorthodox move, the private barrister had been brought in to lead that prosecution by the Najib administration.

So far Shafee has not provided any explanation or responded to the press. Sarawak Report understands that he cancelled engagements at the end of the week, citing he was unwell. He has not denied the figures, which are contained in documents where other payments have been confirmed (including payments to Najib’s brother).
Labour of Love?

It raises some extraordinary issues, because back in 2014 the public was told to believe that this high-powered barrister, a known favourite of the Najib administration, had conducted the entire Appeal prosecution against Anwar for a paltry sum of just RM1,000 (US$230 at present rates).

This was the sum that Nancy Shukri, a minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, provided to Parliament when questioned on this very matter, owing to the unusual nature of Shafee’s appointment to a job that would normally have been done by members of the Public Prosecution Service.

The opposition parties had suspected that Shafee must have been paid far above the normal rates at public expense to conduct the Appeal and then to further take the case through the Federal Court. However, Shukri stunned them with the opposite information.

In an extraordinary statement she said that the government had made an exception to normal rules of privacy in this case, in order to disclose the miscroscopic fee. In fact, the minster added, Shafee had wanted to do the job for nothing at all, hence the token payment. “We wanted to be transparent” she said:

“Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nancy Shukri said she had obtained the agreement of the Attorney-General’s Chambers and Muhammad Shafee himself to reveal the amount after the matter was raised repeatedly in the house.

The matter was kept confidential to respect the ethics of professionalism and confidentiality of communication between employer and client, she said when replying to a question from Er Teck Hwa (DAP-Bakri), reported Bernama.

Er had wanted to know how much Muhammad Shafee was paid as the lead prosecutor during the hearing of Anwar’s case in the Court of Appeal and Federal Court.

The Federal Court upheld a Court of Appeal decision convicting Anwar and sentencing him to five year’s jail after finding him guilty of having sodomised his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, in 2008.

Nancy also said that Muhammad Shafee had not sought a fee for his service but an agreement was reached on the payment.

“He had not wanted any payment for his service but we wanted to be transparent and after providing him with the terms of reference, we agreed on a fee,” she said.

Nancy also dismissed Er’s assumption that Muhammad Shafee’s appointment as the lead prosecutor indicated the weakness of staff in the Attorney-General’s Chambers to handle the case.

She said the appointment of an independent individual was aimed at averting accusations by certain quarters. [Malaysian Times, March 2015]

However, the central to the opposition case was that Shafee Abdullah was not an “independent individual”. He was a known close confidante of the Prime Minister, who had a direct interest in jailing Anwar, a powerful political opponent who had got more votes at the previous election.

Shafee Abdullah was also a material witness to the case, according to the defence, because the lawyer had been in Najib’s house the very day and time that the alleged victim admitted he had been discussing his plans to denounce Anwar Ibrahim with the Prime Minister (a meeting Najib had at first attempted to deny).

Anwar’s case, therefore, was that there had been a clear conspiracy to frame and jail him and that Shafee Abdullah was at the centre of it. However, the court refused to dismiss the unusual move to appoint this “independent individual” to conduct the prosecution in the place of the prosecution service.

‘Independent Individual’? The Very Strange Case Of Special Prosecutor Shafee Abdullah
3 June 2017 – SR


Bar joins calls for probe into report of RM9.5 million payment to lawyer

Bar joins calls for probe into report of RM9.5 million payment to lawyer

THE Malaysian Bar has urged police to investigate the “serious” allegations that the lead prosecutor in Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial was paid RM9.5 million by Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Bar president George Varughese told FMT that while it would be premature for the Bar to refer the lawyer to the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board due to insufficient evidence of misconduct, police must launch a thorough investigation quickly.

“Police must probe the case thoroughly since the allegation is very serious,” said Varughese.

On May 31, whistleblower site Sarawak Report reported that prominent Umno lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, the lead prosecutor in Anwar’s trial, was paid RM9.5 million, which came directly from Najib’s 1MDB slush fund accounts.

Shafee has declined to respond to The Malaysian Insights requests for comment.

Yesterday, Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia Youth chief Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman filed a report urging police to investigate the whistleblower’s claims for the sake of the good name of the Malaysian judiciary. – June 3, 2017.

Bar joins calls for probe into report of RM9.5 million payment to lawyer
3 Jun 2017 – Malaysian Insight


Call for probe into claims that Anwar’s prosecutor got money from Najib

Call for an independent prosecutor to be appointed to probe into claims that Anwar’s prosecutor got money from Najib

I fully support PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s call for Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, the lawyer who successfully led the prosecution that secured his sodomy conviction, to be investigated.

Anwar made the call after allegations emerged that Shafee received RM9.5 million from the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak in two tranches – on Sept 11, 2013, and on Feb 17, 2014.

Anwar said: “The claim by Sarawak Report that RM9.5 million of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds were transferred from Najib’s personal bank account to Shafee’s personal bank account is very serious.

“This matter urgently needs to be investigated by the authorities. What is the purpose of Najib transferring such large amount of funds to the personal bank account of a private lawyer who the Najib administration appointed to handle my prosecution?”

The Prime Minister or the Attorney-General should firstly disclose how much Shafie had cost the government and the taxpayers for engaging Shafie to lead the prosecution team against Anwar, firstly, at the Court of Appeal and secondly, at the Federal Court, when this was the task of the Attorney-General. What were the special or extraordinary circumstances justifying the appointment of Shafee as prosecutor for Anwar’s case.

The Court of Appeal on March 7, 2014, overturned the decision of the High Court in Kuala Lumpur, which acquitted Anwar, and sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment. The Federal Court on Feb 10, 2015, upheld the Court of Appeal’s conviction of Anwar.

Malaysians are entitled to know whether Najib’s RM9.5 million payment to Shafie had anything to do with the two Anwar appeal cases at the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.

Furthermore, the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Mohamad Apani should appoint an independent prosecutor to probe into claims that Anwar’s prosecutor got money from Najib, and the integrity of Anwar’s charge, trial and imprisonment.

Call for an independent prosecutor to be appointed to probe into claims that Anwar’s prosecutor got money from Najib
3 June 2017 –


Why was the lead prosecutor in my trial paid by Najib, Anwar asks

Why was the lead prosecutor in my trial paid by Najib, Anwar asks

JAILED de facto opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim has joined the chorus of voices asking why the lead prosecutor in his sodomy trial was allegedly paid by Prime Minister Najib Razak.

In a statement today, Anwar said the Sarawak Report’s allegation that the prime minister had transferred RM9.5 million to lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah was “very severe”.

“This has to be investigated by the authorities immediately.

“What was the purpose of the huge funds channelled by Najib into the private account of the lawyer, who was appointed by Najib’s government to handle the prosecution against me?

“The more serious question now is – who else has received money from SRC International through Najib’s personal account?” said Anwar.

Whistleblower site Sarawak Report reported in its article “Najib Paid Anwar’s Prosecutor RM9.5 Million From 1MDB Slush Fund WHY?” on May 31 that Shafee was the “biggest individual recipient of money from Najib’s 1MDB slush fund accounts”.

It reported that Najib allegedly paid Shafee RM5.2 million in February 2014 and RM4.3 million in September 2013.

Sarawak report said the money came from the bank account “that had been identified as having been fund by money from the 1MDB subsidiary SRC, which had borrowed some RM4 billion from the civil service pension fund KWAP”.

Shafee did not respond to calls or messages from The Malaysian Insight.

Sarawak Report said the RM5.2 million Shafee allegedly received in February 2014 came just a fortnight before the Appeal Court overturned an earlier acquittal for opposition leader Anwar’s sodomy charge.

Shafee was appointed as the public prosecutor during the appeal against the acquittal of the PKR de facto leader, who was on sodomy charges in 2014.

Earlier today, PKR Youth lodged a police report urging the police to investigate the claims by Sarawak Report. – June 2, 2017.

Why was the lead prosecutor in my trial paid by Najib, Anwar asks
2 Jun 2017 – Malaysian Insight


Probe Umno lawyer for conspiracy, says PKR Youth

Probe Umno lawyer for conspiracy, says PKR Youth

PKR Youth have lodged a police report over allegations that Prime Minister Najib Razak had paid prominent lawyer Mohammed Shafee Abdullah RM9.5 million from a 1Malaysia Development Berhad slush fund account.

PKR Youth deputy chief Dr Afif Bahardin said if there was truth in the article, it meant there was a concerted effort to move funds to Shafee, and a political conspiracy to put then opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim back in jail.

Shafee was appointed as lead prosecutor, a move which raised eyebrows, in Anwar’s sodomy trial at the Court of Appeals in 2014 where his acquittal was overturned.

“The transfer of money coincided with Anwar’s case. We are not saying the Sarawak Report story is the gospel truth. We want the police to investigate the claims,” he told reporters outside the Central Seberang Prai district police headquarters today.

Whistleblower site Sarawak Report reported in its article “Najib Paid Anwar’s Prosecutor RM9.5 Million From 1MDB Slush Fund WHY?” on May 31 that Shafee was the “biggest individual recipient of money from Najib’s 1MDB slush fund accounts”.

It reported that Najib allegedly paid Shafee RM5.2 million in February 2014 and RM4.3 million in September 2013.

The site said the money came from the bank account “that had been identified as having been funded by money from the 1MDB subsidiary SRC, which had borrowed some RM4 billion from the civil service pension fund (Retirement Inc Fund) KWAP”.

Shafee did not respond to calls or messages by The Malaysian Insight.

“This happened when PKR was getting ready for the Kajang by-election in 2014. There are too many coincidences,” Afif said.

He said Anwar could have contested in the by-election, won and become Selangor Mentri Besar that year if the Court of Appeals upheld his acquittal.

Probe Umno lawyer for conspiracy, says PKR Youth
2 Jun 2017 – Malaysian Insight


A ‘public’ prosecutor wouldn’t be paid with ‘private’ money

A ‘public’ prosecutor wouldn’t be paid with ‘private’ money

YOURSAY | ‘ If the allegations aren’t true, then why are they so silent? Why aren’t they issuing denials or suing Sarawak Report?’

Nazri: No impact on Anwar’s trial even if PM paid Shafee

The Observer: Is this an admission that the allegations (lawyer Shafee Abdullah was paid millions of ringgit by Prime Minister Najib Razak) are true?

In other countries, this would have been a scandal of the highest order causing the president or PM to step down. What about here?

Ryan: While Najib may apparently not be a ‘public officer’, he could transfer public funds to his private accounts and use the funds in his private accounts to pay a private lawyer to act as a public servant to sue a private citizen.

Welcome to Bolehland.

The Fog of Life: This is yet another example that confirms that good values among our leadership are non-existent.

The issue is that minister Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz and the rest in Umno can’t even see (read: “Don’t want to see”) the potential legal and ethical issues with the report and the need to address this grave concern.

There is no point asking for transparency and honesty, the agenda is simply the very opposite.

Bluemountains: It is very shameful if a lawyer pretends not to know the implications. The money trail can show the ultimate beneficiaries if the authorities are truly independent and willing to get to the bottom of it.

Tholu: If for just being a hired prosecutor, one gets paid RM9.5 million, I will sell all my properties including my house and car, and take up law in the hope that one day I too will be hired as a government prosecutor and earn an amount that no present day defence lawyers can earn in their lifetime.

Mushiro: Mohamed Nazri himself suggested that the only thing that can change the outcome is if the judge was paid off. Is Mohamed Nazri implying that judges do not take money in Malaysia?

Oscar Kilo: You told us that he was hired by the government to be the public prosecutor, but if Najib personally paid the lawyer, then he is no longer a public prosecutor but instead a personal prosecutor.

Now that’s a conflict of interest.

Mikey!: A public prosecutor isn’t supposed to be a gun for hire. This is the point. Mohamed Nazri, a trained lawyer should know.

If a public prosecutor can be hired to put the screws on someone then no one will be safe. I’m sure there is a law on this.

Krissman: Nazri, even brownnosing has limits. Think just for a second like an ordinary citizen and put yourself in jailed opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim’s shoes. Tell me you still feel the same way as you do now.

I don’t believe you would.

Debater: Nazri has missed the point. The point is not the effect of the payment on the outcome. The point is that it is wrong to pay the lawyer to act as a public prosecutor from a PM’s private account, with allegedly dirty money.

Worse, it was supposed to be the public prosecutor’s case. In other words, the PM had made it his own personal case if he had indeed paid Shafee.

XED: Let us get this straight. Parliament was informed that Muhammad Shafee was paid only RM1,000 for his services, and now there is a RM9.5 million trail from Najib to Muhammad Shafee two weeks before the Court of Appeal hearing of the prosecution’s appeal against Anwar’s acquittal.

If the roles were reversed and BN were in the opposition and it was its leader instead who had suffered Anwar’s fate, then BN would have accused the other side of corruption and abuse of power.

Anonymous #28648954: Dear Nazri, if the allegations aren’t true, then why are Najib and Shafee so silent? Why aren’t they issuing denials?

And why aren’t they suing Sarawak Report for the expose? It would be a sure win for them in court, wouldn’t it?

A ‘public’ prosecutor wouldn’t be paid with ‘private’ money
5 June 2017 – malaysiakini


End Anwar Ibrahim Incarceration – Human Rights Watch

Malaysia: End Anwar Ibrahim Incarceration

Imprisonment of Opposition Leader Makes Mockery of Claims of Democracy

(New York) – On the first anniversary of Anwar Ibrahim’s incarceration on politically motivated charges, the Malaysian government should unconditionally release the former deputy prime minister and political opposition leader, Human Rights Watch said today. The Malaysian government should also ensure that Anwar can access appropriate medical services while imprisoned and facilitate necessary overseas travel to treat the serious ailments he reportedly suffers from in prison.

“Malaysia’s conviction of Anwar Ibrahim was politically motivated, and he’s already suffered through a year in prison from this travesty of justice,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director. “Every day that Anwar is behind bars, confidence in the Malaysian justice system further erodes. The government should release Anwar and repeal the country’s abusive and archaic sodomy laws.”

On February 10, 2015, Malaysia’s Federal Court upheld a Court of Appeal verdict that Anwar was guilty of sodomy under the Malaysian penal code. Anwar was taken into custody and immediately began serving a five-year prison term. A request for a pardon was turned down in March 2015. An appeal of that denial has yet to be decided.

In November 2015, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found that Anwar’s imprisonment violated prohibitions on torture, or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Specifically, the Working Group found that an “adequate remedy would be to release Mr. Ibrahim immediately, and ensure that his political rights that were removed based on his arbitrary detention be reinstated.”

Police arrested Anwar on July 16, 2008, based on a complaint from Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, a political aide, that Anwar had consensual sex with him. The original trial was plagued with serious fair trial concerns, including the prosecutors’ unwillingness to provide defense lawyers with access to medical and other evidence against their client. Nevertheless, the High Court acquitted Anwar on January 9, 2012, ruling that DNA samples that were central to the prosecution’s case had not been handled or maintained properly and thus were possibly contaminated. The High Court judge said the only other major evidence was the alleged victim’s statements, which were uncorroborated.

The government appealed and on March 7, 2014, the Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal and sentenced Anwar to five years in prison. The appeal court hearing, originally scheduled for April, was hurriedly moved to March 6-7. The verdict and sentencing hearings were conducted on the same day despite defense counsel requests that they be given more time, including provision of medical evidence. The sentencing hearing was conducted after a one-hour recess on a day of proceedings that had lasted until 5 p.m.

Anwar’s conviction disqualified him from running for a state assembly seat in Selangor on March 23. Had he been permitted to run and won the seat, he would have been eligible to seek the position of chief minister of Selangor state, a development strongly opposed by the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition.

Anwar’s five-year sentence also carried a subsequent five-year ban on running for office after being released from prison under Malaysia’s elections law, which imposes a ban on anyone who is imprisoned for more than one year – effectively ending his elected political career. Soon after Anwar’s imprisonment, the multi-party Pakatan Rakyat opposition alliance he had led fractured.

“Anwar’s conviction and imprisonment removed a major political threat to the government of Prime Minister Najib Razak,” Robertson said. “The conviction effectively removed a charismatic opposition leader, already in his late sixties, from politics for a minimum of ten years.”

February 8, 2016 – Human Rights Watch
Malaysia: End Anwar Ibrahim Incarceration


UN body calls for Anwar’s immediate release

Anwar’s imprisonment ‘arbitrary’, says UN body

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 2 – A UN body has determined that former Malaysian opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been jailed illegally and called for his immediate release, according to a copy of the opinion released today by his family.

Anwar, 68, was jailed in February for five years after earlier being convicted for sodomising a former male aide. He denies the charge, calling it a frame-up by Malaysia’s long-ruling government to halt recent opposition political gains.

The opinion by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that Anwar’s imprisonment was “arbitrary”, that he was denied a fair trial, and was jailed for political reasons.

“The Working Group considers that the adequate remedy would be to release Mr. Ibrahim immediately, and ensure that his political rights that were removed based on his arbitrary detention be reinstated,” said the opinion, dated September 15.

It also said Anwar’s treatment in prison violates international prohibitions against “torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”

Anwar’s family has complained that he is being held in a filthy cell with only a thin foam mattress despite chronic back trouble, and has been denied adequate medical care for a host of ailments include erratic blood pressure and a shoulder ailment.

“I am deeply grateful that the United Nations has called for Anwar’s release,” said Nurul Izzah Anwar, the former opposition leader’s daughter and a member of parliament.

“Its strong stance in solidarity with my father sends a clear and unequivocal message to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, and ensures that the sharp decline in human rights under his administration will not go unnoticed.”
Anwar’s imprisonment ‘arbitrary’, says UN body
November 2, 2015 – MMO


Aussie ex-judge says Anwar’s trial ‘unusual’

COMMENT In his foreword to Mark Trowell’s latest book, ‘The Prosecution of Anwar Ibrahim – the Final Play’, Michael Kirby described the decision to substitute former opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim’s acquittal with a conviction of the sodomy crime as an “unusual in legal process.”

“Judicial lightning could, it seems, strike twice,” the former Australian High Court judge wrote in the 24-page foreword.

Kirby is no stranger to the state of the judiciary in Malaysia. He has been following the developments in the Malaysian judiciary for at least the past two decades.

Back in 1989, when former Lord President of the Federal Courts of Malaysia Mohamed Salleh Abas published his book ‘May Day for Justice’, the 79-year-old former president of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) had also written the foreword.

Therefore, it is clear from the way he wrote and watching from Down Under, Kirby (left in photo) is deeply engaged emotionally with the current development in Malaysian judiciary.

In this latest foreword, he immediately pointed the reader to a number of other international observers who were present at the Federal Court when it sentenced Anwar to a five-year jail term in February this year, as if to say that he was not the only concerned about the miscarriage of the trial, though it was not clearly stated throughout his writing.

Among them, he said, was one distinguished former Australian judge and a commissioner of the ICJ, Elizabeth Evatt, who wrote that the court’s reversal of the acquittal as “an approach wherein the burden was on Anwar Ibrahim to prove that he had a credible defence, rather than raising reasonable doubt reasonable doubt as to the prosecution’s case.”

Kirby’s foreword, typical of a judge who is meticulous and analytical in his writing, carried a story of his personal encounters with president Nelson Mandela, which I thought were the right settings for Trowell’s second book on Anwar’s Sodomy II case.

He put it so succinctly, explaining “why the principle of open justice is so important”.

“It is why, in today’s world of global news, the commitment to open justice often demands the opportunity for outside scrutiny, lest local passions add to the dangers of miscarriage and to the risk of injustice,” Kirby argued.

Aussie ex-judge says Anwar’s trial ‘unusual’
20/9/15 – Malaysiakini
Stephen Ng

The dawn of A Better Malaysia!
Rafidah Aziz, Hannah Yeoh, Ambiga at TTDI ceramah


Mahathir in Putrajaya ceramah


What happened to 1MDB’s money? – CNBC Video
Nuclear lessons for Malaysia (Part 1) (Part 2)
BN govt is directing attention to distant past and distant future, in order to distract people from present misdeeds and poor governance
Felda - A picture is worth a thousand words
How the 1MDB Scandal Spread Across the World (WSJ)
We cannot afford ridiculously expensive RM55 Billion ECRL!
All that is necessary
for the triumph of evil
is for good men
to do nothing.

- Edmund Burke
When the people
fears their government,
there is TYRANNY;
when the government
fears the people,
there is LIBERTY.

- Thomas Jefferson
Do you hear the people sing?