From Mynews.in

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and SUARAM express their deepest concern regarding the opening on 3 January 2010 of the trial of Anwar Ibrahim, central figure of the Malaysian opposition, accused of sodomy.

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and SUARAM express their deepest concern regarding the opening on 3 January 2010 of the trial of Anwar Ibrahim, central figure of the Malaysian opposition, accused of sodomy.

The trial of Anwar Ibrahim started on January 3 with Mr. Anwar pleading not guilty and claiming that he is victim of politically motivated criminal suit. In August 2008, a few months after the national election in Malaysia, Mr. Anwar was charged with sodomy against a 24 years old former male aide, under section 377B of the Penal Code of Malaysia that criminalizes homosexuality. (more…)

Dari TV Selangor

Kegagalan pasukan peguambela Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim memperoleh dokumen relevan nyata bertentangan dengan semangat Seksyen 51A Kanun Prosedur Jenayah.

Tanpa dokumen itu, pasukan pembelaan Anwar sukar menyediakan pembelaan yang rapi dalam menghadapi pertuduhan yang mencurigakan.

Seksyen itu dipinda dan mula dikuat kuasa sejak 6 Mac 2006 bagi memberi keadilan kepada kedua-dua pihak termasuk tertuduh.

Parlimen memasukkan Seksyen 51A dalam kanun it dengan meletakkan tanggungjawab terhadap pendakwa untuk membekal kepada pembela sebelum perbicaraan bermula, semua dokumen yang hendak diguna oleh pendakwa dalam perbicaraan.

Tujuan Parlimen dalam memasukkan seksyen itu dapat dilihat melalui perbahasan Ahli Parlimen ketika meluluskan rang undang-undang itu. (more…)

11 Feb 2010 (Khamis)
Jam 9.00 – 12.00 Malam

LOKASI :
Dewan Kompleks Sri Siantan
Jalan Sungai Tua
Batu Cave, Selangor

PENCERAMAH:
1.YB Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim
2.YB Azmin Ali
3.YB William Leong Chee Kian
4.YB DR Dzulkefly Ahmad

Hadirlah Beramai-ramai
Kupasan isu-isu semasa

Pejabat Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim

From Peguampas
By Hanipa Maidin

I have been practising as a criminal lawyer for almost 16 years. I have considerable experience defending accused persons who were being charged for sexual related crimes. My experience tells me that the prosecution will never charge a person for an offence of rape or sodomy if the medical evidence is not favourable to them. It is almost an accepted rule of practice or a legal norm, as far as the offence of rape or sodomy is concerned, medical evidence operates as oxygen to the prosecution.

It seems to me that such a practice is no longer adhered to in the current ongoing trial of Anwar Ibrahim. When the accused person is Anwar Ibrahim the rule of game is suddenly and drastically changed. When Anwar is charged the prosecution no longer seems to gauge the strengths of its case on the available evidence they have. When Anwar Ibrahim is tried the prosecution will, come what may, happily proceed with the trial regardless whether it has fragile evidence or no evidence at all against him !!

The only crime Anwar committed in this case is for having the name, Anwar Ibrahim.

I believe that if another person by the name of Ibrahim Anwar or any other Ibrahims allegedly sodomised Saiful the prosecution would not charge such a person when provided with the medical report prepared by doctors in Pusat Rawatan Islam ( Pusrawi ) and Kuala Lumpur General Hospital respectively.

Both reports, as I was told by lawyers in Anwar’s legal team, contain a very damning evidence against the prosecution in that they unequivocally state that there are no visible signs of penetration of Saiful’s anus. As far as the report of the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital is concerned, it was duly signed by three doctors. So what the prosecution have in their possession are the reports certified by four doctors ( one from Pusrawi and three from KLGH ) apparently dismissing the prosecution’s theory that Saiful was ever sodomised by Anwar.

(more…)