The Truth Is Eventually Prevailed!

Former inspector-general of police Musa Hassan’s statements made in yesterday’s interview with Malaysiakini on the Sodomy I case against former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim are seen “as an afterthought”.

On this issue, Musa should have stuck to his evidence given in the trial, his statement to the KL CID investigating team, his own suit against Anwar and the statement given by Mohd Rodwan Yusof, former Kuala Lumpur CID chief Mat Zain Ibrahim said.

Mat Zain, who was the investigating officer in Anwar Ibrahim’s black eye case in 1998, said Anwar while in police custody gave his consent for his blood sample to be taken on Sept 28, 1998, for a HIV test by a Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) doctor.

Mat Zain said the sample was taken and given according to procedures. However, the sample taken for HIV test was taken away, without the doctor’s consent on Oct 15, 1998, for DNA tests as well.

“The doctor should have insisted that the blood sample taken for the HIV test is not suitable for the DNA test, since the procedure for DNA test samples must follow certain protocol,” he said.

Now that Musa had admitted to having used the blood sample for DNA tests with samples taken from the mattress, “then it is as good as him (Musa) admitting that he did not have concrete evidence” when he briefed the then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

“Otherwise, why would Musa want to steal the blood sample from HKL and do the DNA tests on the mattress if he had all the evidence when he briefed Dr Mahathir?” Mat Zain asked.

Mat Zain said it should be remembered that the DNA test was already done at that time and Anwar had already been charged and trial was about to begin in less than a month.

He also noted that the DNA evidence gathered from the mattress was eventually expunged when chemist Lim Kong Boon acknowledged that the evidence could be planted.

In the Malaysiakini interview yesterday, Musa admitted that he took blood samples to conduct the HIV test and it was also used for DNA testing.

This was because, the former IGP said, he had to conduct a full investigation as there were many allegations made in the book “50 reasons why Anwar cannot be PM”.

Good drama script

Without mincing his words, Mat Zain also described Musa’s warning to his (Musa’s) younger brother Fuad not to interfere in the police investigations as “a good drama script”

“If Musa really would arrest his own brother, then he should have arrested present attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail and HKL doctor Dr Abdul Rahman Yusof for fabricating evidence on the black eye investigation.”

The fabricated reports are easily accessible as they are in the public domain.

Mat Zain also said if Musa was honest to himself and the police, he should have supported calls for a tribunal to investigate the allegations made against him and Gani to clear the long-standing disputes.

“The guilty ones must be punished, no matter who they are. Musa knows the various PMs and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong personally. He should not be afraid if he is totally clear of any wrongdoing,” the former KL CID chief challenged.

Absolving himself, Gani and Najib

After having read Musa’s statement on the Altantuya murder case as well, Mat Zain said, it was now more clear that Musa’s willingness to speak to Malaysiakini on various ‘subjects’, and published in parts, was to clear himself, Gani and Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak through the media in view of the coming general election – and possibly revive his younger brother Fuad’s political profile and ambition as well.

He said, Musa brought up Fuad’s name “out of the blue”, when speaking about his role in Sodomy I. Fuad was a former Hulu Kelang assemblyperson and in the 1990s was considered a rising star and possibly, a Selangor menteri besar in the making.

“However, Fuad’s dream of becoming at least an state executive councillor was shattered when he lost to Azmin Ali in the 1999 general election, garnering just 8,039 votes against Azmin’s 9,185. After that defeat Fuad never recovered politically.

“I can’t say whether there is any correlation between Musa suddenly bringing up his brother’s name at this point in time and the resurfacing of Azmin Ali’s 17-year-old corruption case, which has been reopened by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. But the facts are there and I leave it to the people to make their own assessment,” Mat Zain said.

Musa’s statement that the HKL doctor, Abdul Rahman, was appointed by former attorney-general, the late Mohtar Abdullah, was another distortion of facts, he added.

He said Abdul Rahman was appointed on Oct 26, 1998, by Gani, who was then a senior deputy public prosecutor in the AG’s Chambers.

“This fact is clearly stated in Dr Abdul Rahman’s first expert report prepared on Abdul Gani’s instructions. The doctor’s appointment was made despite my objections.

“I have discovered that Dr Abdul Rahman was under police investigation for ‘criminal intimidation’, based on a report lodged against him by another doctor who prepared Anwar’s official medical report.”

“Mohtar then ‘reappointed’ Dr Abdul Rahman on Dec 1, 1998, to cover up the first appointment that was made by Gani. Dr Abdul Rahman, then went on to prepare another two more expert reports which contradict each other, making three expert reports in all, including the one instructed by Gani, although the doctor appointed by the AG did not make any physical examination on Anwar,” Mat Zain revealed.

Abdul Rahman, the former top cop said, went on to give his evidence in the Royal Commission of Inquiry, which contradicted not only his expert report but his statement to the police as well.

This, Mat Zain said, was a clear cut perjury but no action was taken against Abdul Rahman.

Musa, he added, also claimed the AG Chambers did not have any intention of fabricating evidence in the black-eye investigation and that it had the right to call its own experts.

“To this I must say that if Gani did not have any intention of fabricating evidence, then he would not have arm-twisted Dr Abdul Rahman into preparing those three expert reports. Gani knew Dr Abdul Rahman was under police investigations as I told him.

“Musa also cannot deny the fact that he and Gani were present at the 30th floor of the Bukit Aman police headquarters on the night of the black-eye incident and they would have known what exactly happened in the lock-up that night.

“They must realise that any attempt to change the true facts which they both knew as the truth is mere distortion of facts.

“Again, I would suggest that Musa insists that Najib seeks the Agong’s consent to have a tribunal set to investigate this matter and see whether Gani and Musa himself can be cleared or otherwise,” Mat Zain added.

Source: Malaysiakini

Surveillance Inc: How The Western Tech Firms Are Helping Arab Dictators

As democratic movements spread in the Middle East, governments are cracking down, and that means big business for the companies who help them do it.

Reliance means vulnerability, and the activists and citizen journalists of the Arab uprisings rely heavily on the Internet and mobile technology. They use text messaging to coordinate protests, for example, or social media sites to upload the photos and videos that then make it into mainstream global media. In the first protests in Tunisia, because traditional journalists could not get access, citizen journalists filled in, using YouTube and the live-streaming platform UStream to give the world — including, for example, the Egyptians and Syrians who later began revolts of their own — a window into the events there.

For all of the good this technology has done, activists are also beginning to understand the harm it can do. As Evgeny Morozov wrote in The Net Delusion, his book on the Internet’s darker sides, “Denying that greater information flows, combined with advanced technologies … can result in the overall strengthening of authoritarian regimes is a dangerous path to take, if only because it numbs us to potential regulatory interventions and the need to rein in our own Western corporate excesses.”

The communications devices activists use are not as safe as they might believe, and dozens of companies — many of them based in North America and Europe — are selling technology to authoritarian governments that can be used against democratic movements. Such tools can exploit security flaws in the activists’ technology, intercept a user’s communications, or even pinpoint their location. In many cases, this technology has led to the arrest, torture, and even death of individuals whose only “crime” was exercising their universal right to free speech. And, in most of these cases, the public knew nothing about it.

“The Chinese could come here and learn from you.”

Recent investigations by the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg News have revealed just how expansively these technologies are already being used. Intelligence agencies throughout the Middle East can today scan, catalogue, and read virtually every email in their country. The technology even allows them to change emails while en route to their recipient, as Tunisian authorities sometimes did before the revolution.

These technologies turn activists’ phones against them, allowing governments to listen in on phone calls, read text messages, even scan cell networks and pinpoint callers with voice recognition. They allow intelligence agents to monitor movements of activists via a GPS locator updated every fifteen seconds. And by tricking users into installing malware on their devices — as is currently happening in Syria – government agents can remotely turn on a laptop webcam or a cell phone microphone without its user knowing.

In Syria recently, American journalist Marie Colvin and French photographer Rémi Ochlik were killed by a mortar attack that may have been targeted to the locations of their satellite phones. We don’t know for sure how the Syrian army tracked them, but Lebanese intelligence had recorded Syrian officials as planning to target Western journalists, and following satellite phone signals is just one of the tech-aided ways they could have done it.

Syria and other abusive Middle Eastern regimes rely on technology companies such as Area SpA, the Italian firm that contracted with the regime there to build a surveillance center, and that pulled out only after exposure by Bloomberg News prompted protests at their Italian headquarters. There’s also the American company Bluecoat Systems. When it was reported that their Internet-monitoring equipment had been re-sold to the Syrian government, a senior VP told the Wall Street Journal, “We don’t want our products to be used by the government of Syria or any other country embargoed by the United States.”

For all the evil of Syria’s regime, it’s hard to ignore the role and often the complicity of Western technology companies that can sometimes act as dictator’s little helper. While Syria’s use of surveillance has been particularly egregious and well-documented, this problem goes far beyond just one country. For years, Western firms have been selling surveillance equipment to the most brutal regimes. And while sales to Syria often violate sanctions policy, such companies can sell to many other authoritarian countries — many of them U.S. and E.U. allies — without repercussions.

In pre-revolutionary Tunisia, surveillance firms gave discounts to a government agency because the firms wanted to use the country for testing and bug-tracking. The technology was so advanced that it prompted the post-revolutionary head of the Tunisian government’s Internet agency to remark, “I had a group of international experts from a group here lately, who looked at the equipment and said: ‘The Chinese could come here and learn from you.’”

In Bahrain, dozens of political activists have testified that the security officers who detained and beat them also read transcripts of their text messages and emails likely gathered from technology purchased from Germany-based Trovicor, a former Nokia Siemens subsidiary. According to Bloomberg News, a spokesman for the latter confirmed the sale and maintenance of this equipment to the Bahraini government.

“The bulk of this digital arms trade happens under the radar.

Qaddafi’s regime was later found to have spied on Al Jazeera journalist Khaled Mehiri by monitoring his emails and Facebook messages using technology made by French company Amesys. Mehiri was later interrogated and threatened by the head of Libya’s intelligence service. The reporters who found Mehiri’s surveillance file in Tripoli’s abandoned Internet monitoring center discovered similar files on many other journalists, human rights advocates, and democratic activists.

The mass surveillance industry is a large one — estimates now put the global market at $5 billion per year. The businesspeople getting rich from the crackdown industry don’t often talk to the media, but some of the few who do can seem less than concerned about their potential role in their clients’ violence.

Jerry Lucas is the president of Telestragies Inc, the company that runs ISS World, the trade show circuit (also known as the “Wiretapper’s Ball”) that brings these companies and their clients together. Asked by the Guardian in November if he would be comfortable knowing that regimes in Zimbabwe and North Korea were purchasing the technology from his trade shows, he responded, “That’s just not my job to determine who’s a bad country and who’s a good country.” He added, “That’s not our business, we’re not politicians … we’re a for-profit company. Our business is bringing governments together who want to buy this technology.”

This is the crux of the problem: These companies seem fully aware of what they’re doing – after all, the better they understand how to help secret police find and terrorize dissidents, the better their products will do on the market — but far less concerned about the implications. As Dutch member of the E.U. Parliament Marietje Schaake told us last week, “The bulk of this digital arms trade happens under the radar; through spin-offs of well-known companies, but mostly by players without a reputation to lose with consumers.”

Schaake, who has been leading an effort in Europe to halt the sale of surveillance technologies to repressive regimes, helped pass E.U. export restrictions to some government actors in Syria. In the U.S., Rep. Chris Smith introduced a bill in the House that would require American companies listed on the stock exchange to report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on how they conduct due diligence on human rights issues.

Unfortunately, apart from the work of a few individuals, this problem has gone mostly ignored by Western governments, and the digital surveillance trade still seems to be flourishing. Congress, the E.U., and the U.N. all have the ability act — by requiring the relevant companies to at least transparently evaluate whether or not their technology is aiding in human rights abuses, if not banning those sales outright — but so far, even as dozens of Syrians die every day, they haven’t.

Source: www.theatlantic.com

Surat Terbuka Kepada Dato' Dr Hassan Ali

Assalamualaykom w.b.t.

YB Dato’ Dr Hasan Ali yang saya hormati,

Saya kira tidak perlulah saya perkenalkan diri saya memandangkan Dato merupakan tokoh dan sahabat yang saya kagumi. Saya kira, Dato’ juga tetap menganggap saya sebagai kenalan rapat Dato’ sekeluarga. Secara ikhlas, saya mula mengkagumi Dato’ sebagai motivator semenjak saya di bangku sekolah lagi, sehinggalah Dato’ menceburkan diri ke dalam bidang politik. Walau bagaimanapun kekaguman saya tidaklah menjadi penghalang untuk saya menyatakan sedikit pandangan terhadap pendirian Dato’ mutakhir ini berdasarkan neraca ilmu dan keadilan. Kesedaran bahawa apa yang telah Dato’ lemparkan kepada mantan parti Dato’ sendiri, iaitu PAS, di dalam kenyataan-kenyataan Dato’ di media dan juga lewat ceramah-ceramah Dato’ yang bercanggah dari amanah keilmuan dan kebenaran, maka saya terdorong untuk menulis surat terbuka ini.

Sebagai ahli akademik yang mengkaji bidang gerakan Islam, politik Islam dan juga Usul al-Fiqh, saya berasa terpanggil untuk mengarang surat terbuka ini kepada Dato’ untuk menilai beberapa kenyataan Dato’ dari pertimbangan ilmu dan kacamata ilmiah di dalam bidang pengkajian saya. Saya kira tulisan surat terbuka saya sebagai ahli akademik ini adalah sebagai tanggungjawab saya kepada kejujuran terhadap disiplin ilmu yang saya pikul dan bukannya sebagai ahli politik. Saya bukanlah ahli parti PAS, yang tampil untuk membela PAS dari serangan Dato’. Maka saya bertegas menyatakan apa yang saya tulis ini hanyalah semata-mata pendangan orang luar dan ahli akademik yang neutral dan tidak berpihak, baik kepada Dato’ mahupun kepada parti PAS yang telah memecat Dato’.

Saya kira Dato’ mungkin telah maklum dengan pencapaian gerakan-gerakan Islam moderat di utara Afrika seperti Ikhwan Muslimun di Mesir, parti Ennahda di Tunisia, parti keadilan dan pembangunan (PJD) di Morocco dan juga parti-parti Islam lain selepas kebangkitan rakyat (Arab Spring). Kemenangan kesemua gerakan-gerakan tersebut secara empirikalnya seperti yang telah dianalisis oleh pakar politik di rantau berkenaan merujuk kepada tiga perkara utama: ‘Wacana Islam moderat yang segar’; Kesediaan ‘perkongsian kuasa’ (power sharing); dan juga ‘pengaruh di kalangan rakyat’ melalui jaringan kerja kebajikan dan juga pendidikan yang menyeluruh, berterusan serta meluas.

Apa yang dimaksudkan dengan wacana moderat yang segar ialah kemampuan gerakan-gerakan tersebut untuk menawarkan apa yang diperlukan oleh rakyat dan apa yang diperlukan oleh sesebuah Negara di dalam pendekatan mereka. Wacana moderat juga telah memperlihatkan bagaimana gerakan-gerakan Islam, tidak lagi memaksakan apa yang mereka mahukan atau percaya ke atas rakyat tanpa kerelaan majoriti. Maka, di dalam wacana baru mereka, gerakan-gerakan Islam tidak lagi menawarkan retorik ‘Dawlah Islamiyyah’ (Negara Islam) yang agak bersifat utopia dan tidak tentu apakah modelnya. Mereka juga tidak menawarkan hukuman jenayah Islam ‘secara paksaan’ seperti yang pernah dilakukan oleh Taleban di Afghanistan, sebelum keadaan ekonomi dan kebajikan yang kondusif disediakan di dalam negara mereka. Mereka juga tidak mempamerkan diri sebagai penghukum, tetapi mereka muncul sebagai pembawa harapan, pejuang kebebasan dan pelaksana keadilan setelah rakyat ditindas dan dizalimi selama berdekad-dekad lamanya oleh para diktator. Perkara ini telah membuatkan ramai dari kalangan pengkaji di barat telah mula mengatakan bahawa golongan ini telah merubah sikap dan prinsip mereka, lantas menggelar fenomena ini sebagai post-Islamism (pasca-Islamisme).

Saya konsisten untuk tidak menyokong istilah pasca-Islamisme yang sarat dengan makna neo-kolonialisme. Hakikatnya gerakan-gerakan Islam yang terlibat tidak pernah merubah prinsip. Mereka juga tidak meninggalkan landasan perjuangan, apatah lagi mengubah pendirian. Apa yang berlaku ialah proses kematangan gerakan-gerakan terlibat untuk melihat Islam dalam kerangkanya yang lebih luas dan komprehensif. Kejayaan beberapa individu berlatarbelakangkan Islamis di Turki melalui agenda neutral AKP, telah menjadi sumber inspirasi gerakan-gerakan tersebut. Wacana ini juga bertunjangkan konsep Maqasid al-Shariah dan melihat ajaran Islam dari aspek yang holistik, terutamanya aspek moral dan keadilan. Gelombang perubahan pada pendekatan inilah yang telah melanda kebanyakan gerakan Islam di seluruh dunia mutakhir ini, tidak ketinggalan PAS yang Dato pernah sertai dahulu. Gelombang ini sekaligus melenyapkan pengaruh model Iran yang pernah mendominasi wacana gerakan-gerakan Islam sedunia dengan melaungkan pembinaan sebuah republik Islam dan juga pemerintahan mutlak golongan agama (Wilayatul Faqih).

Realitinya kini, gerakan-gerakan Islam moderat yang wujud lebih memilih ruang demokrasi untuk membawa perubahan. Mereka juga melaungkan pembentukan negara sivil milik semua warga dengan menjamin kebebasan politik, penegakan keadilan, hak upaya masyarakat sivil, hak wanita, tatakelola yang baik, kebajikan rakyat yang terpelihara, ekonomi yang lebih berdaya saing serta bebas dari korupsi, pecah amanah dan rasuah, serta perkongsian kuasa bersama rakyat dari segala lapisan dan kumpulan. Menurut kajian saya ke atas wacana baru PAS, terutamanya melalui konsep ‘Negara Berkebajikan’, PAS juga tidak terlepas dari arus perubahan ini. Jika Dato’ merasakan pendekatan baru PAS ini bermakna PAS telah meninggalkan perjuangan Islamnya, saya kira Dato’ tersilap. Perubahan pada PAS bukanlah kerja parasit sepertimana yang Dato’ dakwa, tetapi ianya merupakan satu dinamisme tabi’i bagi sebuah gerakan Islam yang matang. Jikalaulah parasit yang telah menyebabkan perubahan pada PAS, maka pastinya kesemua gerakan Islam di Utara Afrika dan Asia Barat, termasuk Ikhwan Muslimin di Mesir dan juga parti Ennahda juga telah dilanda parasit. Timbul dilemma di dalam pemikiran saya, apakah pemimpin dan tokoh ideolog gerakan Islam sedunia, Rashid Ghannoushi yang telah mencetuskan wacana gerakan Islam yang baru itu juga telah dijangkiti parasit? Apakah mungkin Dato ingin mengatakan bahawa Rashid Ghannoushi yang merupakan sumber inspirasi perubahan fikrah pada gerakan-gerakan Islam moderat sedunia itu pula merupakan bapa parasit?

Yakinlah Dato’, sepertimana gerakan-gerakan tersebut telah berjaya mendapatkan majoriti undi di dalam pilihanraya di negara-negara mereka kerana pendekatan baru ini, PAS juga sedang meniti langkah tersebut. Inilah yang ditakuti oleh UMNO dan kerajaan BN. Pihak lawan tidak mahukan PAS mendapat sokongan majoriti masyarakat Islam dan bukan Islam di Malaysia. Pihak lawan mahu PAS kekal sebagai parti kampung milik Pak Lebai dan Pak Haji. Pihak lawan juga tidak mahu PAS bangkit sebagai parti milik semua rakyat Malaysia, mereka lebih selesa PAS dikenali sebagai parti ekstrimis dan fundamentalis yang hanya tahu memotong tangan orang sahaja. Hanya dengan wacana Islamis global yang baru ini sahajalah niat buruk mereka akan terhalang. Malang sekali apabila Dato’ pula yang mula bercakap senada dan seirama dengan pihak lawan menentang perubahan pada PAS. Lebih malang lagi kini Dato’ menjadi suara pihak lawan untuk memaksa PAS kembali ke kerangka persepsi lama rakyat terhadap mereka yang telah dilelong oleh pihak UMNO dan BN.

Saya yakin, di dalam PAS masih terdapat segelintir yang termakan umpan Dato’ lantas mempercayai kewujudan parasit. Mereka ini golongan yang ikhlas tetapi hanya kurang mendapat pendedahan terhadap dunia luar sahaja. Ada di antara mereka juga yang berkepentingan, lantas menggunakan hujah Dato’ untuk kekal berpengaruh, tetapi saya yakin mereka ini teramat kecil bilangannya. Melalui pengamatan saya, PAS akan terus menggalas harapan rakyat dan juga kefahaman Islam yang sebenar berteraskan wacana baru gerakan Islam sedunia untuk menempuh hari muka mereka. Seperkara yang perlu Dato’ ketahui, wacana baru gerakan Islam moderat ini juga telah mendapat restu dari para ulama terkemuka seperti Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Dr Tawfiq al-Wa’ie, Dr Rashid al-Ghannoushi. Amat kasihan kerana Dato’ tidak dapat bersama lagi dengan realiti baru ini.

Apabila melihat kepada isu ‘Negara Berkebajikan’ pula, pada hemat saya, setelah meneliti dokumen ‘Negara Berkebajikan’ PAS dan membandingkannya dengan manifesto parti-parti Islam moderat lain di dunia Arab, saya mendapati PAS ternyata senada dengan mereka yang telah Berjaya di negara masing-masing. Saya berkeyakinan gagasan ‘Negara Berkebajikan’ merupakan satu langkah drastik PAS di dalam membawa perubahan dan menyuarakan persiapan mereka untuk muncul sebagai alternatif kepada parti pemerintah yang sedia ada. Prinsip-prinsip konsepsual ‘Negara Berkebajikan’ yang dibentangkan di dalam dokumen tersebut dan juga cadangan mekanisme perlaksanaannya merupakan satu anjakan paradigma bagi sebuah gerakan dakwah dan parti politik yang telah matang seperti PAS. Jelas sekali PAS sudah melayakkan dirinya untuk menyertai gelombang perubahan yang melanda gerakan Islam di seluruh dunia dengan membuktikan bahawa golongan Islamis mampu dan bersedia untuk berkongsi kuasa dan memerintah di dalam kerangka demokrasi dan tatakelola yang baik. Malangnya, hal ini tidak disambut positif oleh Dato’, malah dipandang sinis.

Melihat kepada isu hudud yang Dato’ anggap telah ditinggalkan oleh PAS, saya kira itu juga agak kurang tepat. Sebagai sebuah parti Islam, saya berpendapat PAS dilihat amat konsisten memperjuangkan apa yang mereka yakini, iaitu kewajipan melaksanakan hukum hudud. Apa yang menarik ialah pendekatan PAS yang terbuka untuk membicarakan isu tersebut di ruang umum dan bersedia untuk meyakinkan rakyat melalui proses pendidikan dan dakwah adalah sesuatu yang patut dihargai. Apa yang saya dapati melalui metod obervasi ke atas ruang ‘discursive’ PAS selama ini, PAS tidak memilih untuk memaksakan hudud ke atas orang lain secara kekerasan. Malah di dalam banyak kenyataan PAS, mereka bersedia untuk mendengar suara majoriti di dalam melaksanakan hukum jenayah Syariah itu. Pendekatan diplomasi PAS ini harus dihormati kerana ia mencerminkan sikap professionalisme PAS dan keterbukaan para pimpinannya. Saya kira kerana sikap konsisten PAS inilah yang menyebabkan parti itu telah berjaya meraih sokongan ramai bukan Islam melalui ‘Kelab Penyokong PAS’.

Akhirkata, jika Dato’ benar-benar ingin memperjuangkan aqidah dan memerangi gejala murtad yang dikatakan sebagai mengancam umat Islam di Selangor, saya mempunyai pelan tindakan yang boleh Dato’ lakukan berdasarkan kekuatan yang ada pada diri Dato’. Sebagai seorang motivator yang begitu meyakinkan dan berupaya bermain dengan emosi orang ramai, saya rasa sudah sampai waktunya Dato’ untuk turun padang bertemu dengan mereka yang didakwa murtad berdasarkan senarai yang rakan-rakan Dato’ miliki. Mungkin juga Dato’ boleh menggunakan kemahiran tersebut juga untuk berdakwah kepada mat-mat rempit, tahi dadah, remaja berpeleseran yang terdapat di dalam negeri Selangor secara sukarela tanpa sebarang bayaran. Jika dulu mungkin Dato’ sibuk dengan tugas exco, kini Dato’ lebih mempunyai waktu lapang. Buktikanlah kata-kata Dato’ yang ingin menjaga aqidah itu. Saya kira Dato’ juga boleh berdakwah di Hard Rock Café menyeru umat Islam agar bertaubat dan menghayati agama Islam. Saya pasti pemilik Hard Rock Café tidak akan menghalang kerja murni Dato’ itu. Saya yakin 10,000 atau lebih orang yang turut berHIMPUN bersama Dato’ untuk menyelamatkan aqidah umat Islam boleh Dato’ kerahkan dari seluruh negara untuk sama-sama turun padang demi menyelamatkan aqidah umat Islam secara praktikal. Saya amat meyakini, jika Dato’ berdakwah seperti itu, Dato’ akan tetap dikenang kawan ataupun lawan sebagai ‘pejuang aqidah yang sebenar!’.

Dr Maszlee Malik

Ahli Akademik Politik Warga

UIAM

Gambar2 Sekitar Himpunan 901: Mahkamah Jalan Duta

The Acquittal Is In Accord With Evidence: Malaysian Bar

The Malaysian Bar welcomes the decision of the High Court in acquitting Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim.  The principles of natural justice call for nothing less, in light of the grave concerns over whether the accused’s right to a fair trial was preserved.

Based on news reports of the trial, it is clear that the High Court decision is in accord with the evidence for, amongst others, the following reasons:

(1) The lack of full disclosure: Both prior to and during the trial itself, the legal team for the defence was denied access to certain documents and physical evidence in the possession of the prosecution, which disadvantaged the accused in the preparation of his defence;

(2) Unreliable DNA evidence: There were obvious concerns that the DNA sample submitted as evidence was unreliable or may have been compromised.

(3) Certain unusual findings during the trial proceedings:

(a) The trial judge made an unprecedented finding at the end of the prosecution’s case that the complainant was a truthful and credible witness, without the benefit of having heard the defence.

(b) While the court allowed the Prime Minister and his wife to be interviewed by the defence legal team, the subpoena issued by the defence compelling the attendance of the Prime Minister and his wife was set aside by the High Court upon the application of the prosecution.  The absence of curiosity in this regard casts grave concerns on the credibility of the complaint in the first place.

(4) The unrefuted relationship between the complainant and a member of the prosecution team, which raised serious questions whether the complainant had access to investigation papers, which would have enabled him to tailor his evidence at trial.

The charge against Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, which is based on an archaic provision of the Penal Code that criminalises consensual sexual relations between adults, should never have been brought.  The case has unnecessarily taken up judicial time and public funds.

The Malaysian Bar hopes that the Attorney General would not pursue any appeal, and will instead focus the valuable resources of the Attorney General’s Chambers on more serious crimes.

By Malaysian Bar

Al Jazeera & CNN On Anwar Acquittal

Anwar: Message On Eve Of 901

Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

Tanggal esok 9 Januari 2012 ini, penghakiman kes Fitnah Liwat II akan termaktub dalam sejarah, samada sebagai detik penentuan keadilan ditegakkan ataupun hari gelap buat kedaulatan undang-undang dan kepada mereka yang perjuangkan keadilan.

Saya menyeru seluruh rakyat Malaysia agar membulatkan tekad serta iltizam dalam menuntut pembaharuan politik. Mereka boleh mengaibkan saya, mereka boleh menghumban saya ke penjara, mereka boleh menginjak hak rakyat dan mereka boleh memukul kita hanya kerana berkumpul, akan tetapi mereka takkan dapat merampas kehormatan diri, maruah serta semangat kita untuk melakukan apa yang benar dan memperjuangkan apa yang kita percaya.

Mengulangi fitnah keji sejak dari 1998 lagi terhadap diri saya dan sepanjang sandiwara perbicaraan yang panjang ini, pelbagai fitnah dan tohmahan telah dilemparkan, namun ianya tidak menghakis keyakinan rakyat.  Kita telah menyaksikan betapa polis, pihak pendakwaan dan kehakiman serta media yang dikawal UMNO berganding bahu memastikan agar kerajaan BN yang rasuah dan zalim ini terus berkuasa.

Walau apa pun jua penghakiman yang akan diputuskan nanti, ia harus tetap melonjakkan semangat dan keyakinan menuntut perubahan bagi menegakkan hukum, melaksanakan sistem ekonomi saksama dan memupuk semangat persaudaraan yang tulen. Usaha dan upaya mestilah digembeling demi membanteras kezaliman, rasuah dan penyalahgunaan kuasa. Pastikan pada Pilihanraya Umum ke 13 nanti, kebangkitan rakyat akan menghumban penguasa angkuh  dari tampuk pemerintahan.

Mereka mungkin berhasrat memenjara dan merantai saya tetapi mereka takkan sesekali dapat memasung jiwa dan semangat saya. Di sini saya mengulangi ikrar bahawa saya tidak akan berhenti selagi kita belum berjaya melaksanakan Perubahan dan  menghapuskan segala kebejatan yang dilakukan oleh kerajaan UMNO-BN dan membangunkan sebuah bangsa yang adil lagi saksama. Berbekalkan semangat perjuangan yang murni serta bertawakal kepada Allah, Inshaallah, perjuangan kita akan mencapai kejayaan.

Saya akan tetap bersama anda semua di hati dan jiwa saya dan bersama-samalah kita bina sebuah negara Malaysia yang baharu.

The Anwar Verdict: January 9th, 2012

We have a stake not just in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals.” That was President Obama at the State Department last May, rolling out his own version of the freedom agenda for the Muslim world. So why has the Administration been virtually silent when it comes to one of the most notorious and long-running abuses of power taking place in the Muslim world today—this one in our good friend and ally, Malaysia?
 

The abuses in question concern Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who on Monday faces a verdict—and potentially years of jail time—on dubious sodomy charges. Mr. Anwar first went through this charade as a deputy prime minister in the late 1990s, when he fell out with then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad during the Asian financial crisis, was savagely beaten by police and ultimately sentenced to prison on sodomy and corruption charges.

Mr. Anwar spent six years in prison. In 2004 the sodomy charges were overturned by the country’s highest court—a year after Mr. Mahathir had left office. Yet Mr. Anwar was again served with sodomy charges four years later, after the ruling UMNO party had lost its two-thirds majority and the opposition seemed close to assembling a parliamentary majority.

The current case is even flimsier than the last one. It is based mainly on the word of one accuser who, as it so happened, had met with then-deputy prime minister, now Prime Minister, Najib Razak days before the alleged incident. Doctors at two hospitals could find no evidence of rape in the aftermath of the alleged incident. Nonetheless, political observers anticipate a guilty verdict.

This is happening in the context of growing discontent among Malaysians with UMNO’s ruling order, and Mr. Najib’s ambivalent attempts at political reform. But if that’s reminiscent of the unhappiness that presaged the Arab Spring, so too is the don’t-rock-the-boat attitude of the Obama Administration.

Malaysia is supposedly a moderate Muslim country and a useful regional counterweight to China, and the President was full of praise for Mr. Najib’s “great leadership” when they last met in November. As for Mr. Anwar, the State Department has publicly offered no more than boilerplate about his case. Perhaps quiet diplomacy is now at work on Mr. Anwar’s behalf, but that kind of diplomacy is fine only as long as it produces results.

In the meantime, Malaysian democracy could benefit from a sign that the U.S. is not indifferent to Mr. Anwar’s legal ordeal or to the political system that has allowed it to continue. U.S. interests could benefit as well. “Failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that has festered for years that the United States pursues our own interests at their expense,” said Mr. Obama in May. Mr. Anwar’s case gives the President a chance to show that he meant what he said.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Rakaman Wawancara Sinar TV Anwar Ibrahim

AP Interview: Malaysian In Sodomy Trial Slams Law

With the verdict in his sodomy trial days away, Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on Thursday decried the laws he’s charged with breaking, calling them archaic rules that can be abused to promote intolerance, invade people’s privacy and punish them too harshly.

The remarks place Anwar, who denies the charges that he sodomized a young male former aide, alone among senior Malaysian politicians. Government and opposition leaders alike in this Muslim-majority nation usually avoid making statements that could be perceived as a nod to gay rights, partly because of discomfort among religious conservatives.

Sodomy in Malaysia is punishable by 20 years in prison and whipping with a rattan cane. The 64-year-old Anwar said he is bracing for the possibility of a long prison sentence when the Kuala Lumpur High Court delivers a decision Monday. He will not face the whipping penalty because of his age.

“My view is that you can’t have laws to be abused for political purposes and to be seen to be punitive and to be unjust to others,” Anwar said in a telephone interview while traveling on a six-day tour of the country for opposition rallies ahead of the verdict.

Anwar’s 26-year-old accuser, Saiful Bukhari Azlan, testified that Anwar coerced him into having sex at a Kuala Lumpur apartment in 2008. Anwar did not take the witness stand but criticized the proceedings in a long courtroom tirade from behind the lawyers’ table, where he could not be cross-examined.

Anwar, who is married with six children, insists he is innocent and claims the sodomy charge is part of a government conspiracy to discredit him and destroy the opposition’s chances of winning general elections widely expected this year. Prime Minister Najib Razak has denied any plot.

The anti-sodomy law is seldom and selectively enforced, often only in cases of sexual abuse of children and teenagers, but gay rights activists have long claimed that it encourages homophobia. New York-based Human Rights Watch last month urged Malaysia to abandon laws banning same-sex relations.

Anwar said that although he believes government must prohibit same-sex marriage and prevent public obscenity, he also believes that current sodomy laws could “be abused to show violent discrimination or intolerance.”

“Our present laws are deemed to be rather archaic,” Anwar said. “The whole idea (should be) to encourage people to understand not to be seen to be so punitive. In this case it’s worse — you can go and probe and peep into people’s bedrooms just to try to smear them.”

This is Anwar’s second time on trial for sodomy. A former deputy prime minister, Anwar was found guilty in 2000 of sodomizing his family’s ex-driver, but Malaysia’s top court freed him from prison in 2004 after quashing his conviction and nine-year sentence.

The current charge surfaced in 2008, several months after Anwar led the opposition to its best electoral results since independence from Britain in 1957.

Anwar said Thursday that regardless of the verdict, his three-party alliance is determined to unseat Najib’s long-ruling coalition in the next elections and form an administration that would curb corruption and racial discrimination. The opposition now controls slightly more than one-third of Parliament’s seats.

“The likelihood of our winning elections … is not a far-fetched idea,” Anwar said. “We believe that change is imminent and for the benefit of all Malaysians.”

Source: Associated Press

January 4th, 2012: Anwar In Seremban