Ramkarpal: DNA samples no longer pristine

Rosmah, Marina sebagai teladan: Apa kata Dr Mahathir?

Six-year-old 'soldier for Khilafa': kids radicalised in shocking video

A Muslim youth group is under investigation after a disturbing video of children as young as six years old calling for an end to Australian democracy was unearthed by 7News.

In the vision, children as young as six years old call for violent action against non-Muslims and to reject Australia and its values.

A terror risk expert says it's brainwashing, aimed at creating violent extremists.

The video shows four Australian children, aged six to 13, calling for an end to our way of life.

"These are disturbing and shocking images and they do raise concerns about the welfare of the four young boys who are identified in the video,” Family and Community Services Minister Gabrielle Upton said.

A group calling itself The Muslim Youth Project runs regular events for young children.

In the video of the event held on September 21 in 2013 in Lakemba, young boys rally under the banner "Soldiers of Khilafa" with a six-year-old proclaiming:

"You're never too young to be a Soldier for Khilafa."

Read more: https://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/25380378/video-reveals-shocking-radicalisation-of-australian-muslim-children/

Ex-Google employee held for trying to join Islamic State

HYDERABAD : A former Google employee was detained for allegedly trying to join the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq, police said, after making a breakthrough which could help them bust an organised network of home-grown jihadis, planning to join the militant group.

Police sources in Hyderabad said that security analyst Munawad Salman, 30, a resident of Musheerabad, was held after officials tracked his conversation for months and was certain that his hidden agenda to visit Saudi Arabia was to cross over to Iraq and join Islamic State .

"He is being grilled for more information. This is perhaps the first time, a software engineer has got attracted to a global terror outfit like Islamic State in the recent past," a senior police official told TOI.

"The arrest is very significant and could open a big door for us to trace more educated youth getting influenced by militants," the officer said, referring to IS, whose main motive is to establish Caliphate (Islamic State) in vast swathes of the world.

Software engineer Salman, quit his Google India job six months ago. Since then, he had been actively reading 'Al Isabha' web propaganda, which is again run by sympathizers of Islamic State , formerly Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and al-Qaida, to target Indian Muslims, sources said.

The techie is learnt to have been in touch with handlers from ISIS for nearly a year and has allegedly exchanged emails before being completely influenced by people behind 'Al Isabha'.

With security agencies on high alert across the country, especially on the look out for prospective people or sympathizers of Islamic State and al-Qaida, planning to join the outfits, they stumbled upon Salman's conversation with his handlers.

During interrogation, Salman said he had a visa to travel to Saudi Arabia and join a local company there.

"He has a proper job visa to go to Saudi Arabia, but there was clear indications that he was planning to join IS either immediately or later. The family members also counselled him to desist from getting attracted to such ideas, when they came to know about the matter," another official said.

The techie is learnt to have been in touch with handlers from ISIS for nearly a year.

This is not the first time members of Islamic State managed to lure youth from Hyderabad as nearly 15 of them, including some engineering students, made vain attempts to join Islamic State and were caught on the West Bengal border in September this year.

It is not clear whether Salman will be counselled and let off, just like the earlier students. Security experts said concerns are mounting whether there are more people waiting in the wings or have slipped out of the country already to join the militant outfit, currently engaged in a bitter battle with US forces.

Last week, the police broke an alleged Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and al-Qaida nexus in the city with arrest of two persons. They were planning to go to Afghanistan and join al-Qaida.

Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami chief found guilty of rape, genocide; to be hanged to death

Dhaka: In what a special Bangladeshi war crimes tribunal called a 'historic' verdict, the head of Jamaat-e-Islmai, Motiur Rahman Nizami, was handed death sentence for 1971 war crimes, sparking fears of fresh violence.

71-year-old Nizami was tried on over a dozen charges and found guilty of genocide, torture, murder, rape etc.

Announcing the verdict, the three-member court ruled that the former cabinet minister must be “hanged by neck to death” as despite being a scholar he “misinterpreted Quran” and was involved in killing of professors, doctors and writers during the nine-month conflict, the AFP quoted prosecutor Haider Ali.

During the conflict, Nizami ran a brutal militia named Al-Badr, which was notorious for having committed heinous war crimes.

Security has been beefed up in Dhaka and across the country as the verdict has triggered fresh fears of the country's largest religious party fomenting marches and violence in protest of Nizami's death sentence.

Some two lakh women were reportedly raped, three million people were killed and millions more were forced to escape to India in the 1971 war of independence after Bangladesh split from Pakistan.

About a dozen Islamist leaders have been convicted of war crimes by the tribunal which is opposed by the Islamists as a tool by the Sheikh Hasin government to settle scores against the opposition.

While PM Sheikh Hasina considers it as a way to bring to task the perpetrators of atrocities in 1971 war that left scores dead.

MP urges Putrajaya to fix mininum age for marriage – Bernama

An opposition Member of Parliament today called on the the government to fix the minimum age for young couples to get married so as to stop child marriages.

Teo Nie Ching (DAP-Kulai, pic) claimed that besides not attending school any more there was high incidence of divorce which had had a negative impact on the children.

She said although existing laws allowed Malaysians from 16 to 18 years to marry, there were situations which allowed them to enter wedlock at a younger age.

"We can no longer afford to see our young getting married at 11 or 12 years of age. This is one issue that needs immediate attention," she said when debating the Supply Bill 2015 in the Dewan Rakyat today.

Teo said the government had adopted the resolution by the United Nations to stop child marriages in October last year, but there were no clear measures for its implementation in this country.

"The time has come to ensure that children in this country, regardless of religion do not marry until the reach the age of maturity," she said.

She also questioned the logic of giving children the freedom to choose their spouse at a young age when they were not even allowed to have a driving licence or to vote because they had not reached the permitted age.

At the same time, Teo also urged that the allocation to the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development be increased as much of it was spent on social welfare and not just on women.

The Dewan sits again tomorrow. – Bernama, October 29, 2014.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/mp-urges-putrajaya-to-fix-mininum-age-for-marriage-bernama#sthash.o9LGlrdl.dpuf

Dr M defends Ibrahim's 'burn Bibles' remark

 

Dr Mahathir Mohamad has defended Ibrahim Ali for his controversial "burn Bible" remark, saying it is not seditious.

On the contrary, the former prime minister said, the Perkasa chief was advising "something that is acceptable to Muslims" with regard to the practice of burning old copies of the Al-Quran.

"It was not his (Ibrahim's) intention to provoke clashes between Muslims and non- Muslims," Mahathir told reporters today.

However, Mahathir, who is also the patron of Perkasa, declined to comment on the attorney-general's decision not to prosecute Ibrahim under the Sedition Act for his call to burn the Bible in the Malay language.

The authorities claimed that the statement of Ibrahim (left) was made in defence of Islam, based on complaints that certain quarters had distributed copies of the Bible in the Malay language in a school, including to Muslim students.

Meanwhile, Mahathir said it was common practice for Muslims to burn the Al-Quran, when the copy was old and doing so without ill intentions was not wrong.

"We often burn the Al-Quran, when the Al-Quran is very old. Of course we cannot treat a holy book by throwing it around, so the best solution is to burn," he added.

Therefore, he said it was not an issue for Ibrahim to invite Muslims to burn copies of the Bible if the intention was good.

'Show respect for the Bible'

Nevertheless, Mahathir said Muslims must show respect for the Bible.

"For the Muslims, if they have something or some document which they are averse to, they should not throw it around, they should not throw it on the ground and step on it.   

"They should show respect for the Bible and by burning it the way they burn the Al-Quran, that is permitted," he added.

On the forum, Mahathir said Malaysians can expect to have a female prime minister one day.

"In a democratic country, it is majority support that counts, when a woman gets majority support, she cannot be stopped from becoming prime minister.

"Constitutionally, there are no obstructions, it all depends, in a democratic country, on majority support.

"If she can win a majority of above 50 percent, and your party had elected you as president, then most likely the president of the party, who is a woman, can become prime minister," Mahathir added.

Anwar defends appointing ex-judge as counsel

 

PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim has defended his decision to appoint retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram as his counsel, follow criticisms on the matter.

"He has been my best defence (counsel)," he said, adding that his performance is "impressive".

Lawyer for the prosecution Mohd Shafee Abdullah also said that it is not wrong for the ex-judge to represent Anwar.

"I don't think we can hinder anyone, as that is his right," he said.

The remarks come after a group of 21 lawyers and activists have added to the chorus demanding that the Bar Council makes clear its stance after a former Federal Court judge acted for Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in his sodomy appeal.

The lawyers, who include former Perkasa vice-president Zulkifli Noordin and pro-Sedition Act leader Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz, said this is because the Bar Council had earlier this year passed a resolution urging the prohibition of retired senior judges to act as counsel in court.

Mohd Khairul (right) had previously proposed an alternative Bar Council after accusing the statutory body of being an opposition sympathiser.

"It is not proper for the Bar Council to have two sets of principles that differ when Anwar Ibrahim is involved and the credibility of the legal profession is surely tarnished by such hypocritical actions," the lawyers said in a joint statement this afternoon.

Gopal Sri Ram yesterday acted as Anwar's new lead counsel and made submissions in the opposition leader's defence in the apex court.

The group urged the Bar Council to immediately weigh into the issue as failure to do so would reflect badly on the body.

"President of the Malaysian Bar maintains a deafening silence, which can only be described as hypocritical, to say the least, in the face of the actions of Gopal Sri Ram. The Bar Council has failed to comply with its own resolution in this matter.

"The Bar Council's silence is a contradiction of its own commitment to uphold justice without fear or favour," they said.

'Principle of antiquity'

The lawyers who signed the joint statement included Faidhur Rahman Abdul Hadi, Azril Mohd Amin, Mohammad Yahya Zakaria and Farah Nadiah Zainuddin.

Other activists who are party to the statement include Zamzuri Mohamed Tahir, Ahmad Soffian Mohd Sheriff, Suhaimi Adnan (right) and Nadiah Hanum Md Nadzri.

The Bar Council in its resolution had said that it is a principle of antiquity in common law that retired judges of superior courts should not appear as counsel in court hearings and this had been observed for decades.

However, it noted that this principle was not abided by in recent years and a group of six retired judges had written to the Bar Council to express concern.

"In the context, retired judges of the superior court having failed to honour tradition and convention by appearing as counsel, they must now be prohibited or restricted by law from continuing with such unacceptable conduct," the Bar said in the resolution.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, when met at the Palace of Justice after attending Anwar's hearing, said he agreed with the Bar Council's resolution but Gopal's appointment was Anwar's personal decision.

"Personally, I will respect the Bar Council resolution but I think this decision is up to Anwar to decide.

"Because the very basic principle in law is that an accused has a right to seek the best defence counsel, so I think this is his personal decision to make," said Lim, who is also Penang chief minister.

Anwar's team defends Gopal

Meanwhile, Anwar's lawyers N Surendran and Eric Paulsen said Gopal's appointment is not an issue as a previous Federal Court decision had already ruled that he can act as counsel despite being a retired superior court judge.

Surendran (left) and Paulsen pointed out that Gopal, as a former federal court judge, was not representing Anwar in a lower court but one that is equal to his level.

"This is the Federal Court, the highest court in the country," they said.

Surendran also clarified that it was Anwar's defence team who approached the ex-judge, following lead counsel Sulaiman Abdullah illness, for his services and not the other way around.

"In the best traditions of the Bar, he agreed to take up the case on a short notice," he said.

Anwar yesterday told reporters that Gopal Sri Ram had approached him for the job.

Surendran also brushed aside criticism over the fact that Gopal Sri Ram had before this represented Umno.

Citing the ex-judge himself, he said a lawyer is "like a cab driver, where if someone stops him he takes them in".

Anwar was on March 7 jailed for five years by the Court of Appeal which found him guilty of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan in 2008.

His final appeal against the sentence began yesterday at the Federal Court and the hearing is slated for two days.

Anwar, who is free on bail, maintains the charge against him is politically motivated.

Court told to acquit Anwar due to 'clear doubt'

 

LIVE REPORTS

5.25pm: Court adjourns after Ram indicates that he will finish his submission tomorrow. Shafee indicates that he can start tomorrow for the prosecution team. The hearing is expected to end on Friday.

5.15pm: Ram says Seah reported that in the high rectal swab there is an unidentified male DNA but she reported it as a "dropping".

"The reading of 18 allele, our defence expert says, should be reported.

"This shows the presence of another person or the high rectal swab has been contaminated (like B5 the peri-anal) swab."

5.10pm: Ram says a clear doubt has emerged, and when this appears, a decision must be given in benefit of the accused.

5.05pm: Ram says the contamination could have been due to from doctors or Supt Jude. "It was innocent contamination."

"At the moment we do not know who and how the peri-anal samples were handled."

5.00pm: Ram says there is a possibility of the samples being contaminated.

He says that there is an unknown male DNA found in B5 besides that of "Male Y" in the peri-anal swab.

4.50pm: Ram says there are examples of degradation of other samples.

(There were 12 swabs taken during the HKL doctor's examination of Saiful).

"Some are pristine some are not," says the lawyer.

"... The Court of Appeal judges had erred where the High Court judge had got it right."

4.40pm: Ram says in every mixture in (sexual acts) sperm cells must be separated from the non-sperm cells.

"But the DNA of 'Male Y' is found to be pristine. The point from Mc Donalds B7, B8 and B9 samples are pristine.

"It cannot be pristine. I go further to say they are not the same samples. If they are the same samples, there will be a lot of degradation," he adds.

4.30pm: Ram says if the samples are not properly preserved, how could it be pristine.

He says in the B8 high rectal swab where there is a mixture i.e. a major and minor contributor.

"It is pristine and this is inconsistent with history.

"Similarly with B9 the lower rectal, it is pristine," he says, adding that the sample was taken after 96 hours but looked fresh.

4.20pm: Ram says if there was a dispute, the prosecution can call its expert witness to rebut.

"The fact is that the samples are found to be pristine."

The defence lawyer says the samples were retrieved after 96 hours, and should show degradation.

Justice Arifin asks if there are samples to show degradation.

"If it is degraded it would become a mess i.e. no reading."

4.10pm: Ram says there is a dispute on the issue of contamination where he feels the appellate judges misdirected themselves.

The lawyer says the defence chemist were “enlightening the court” on what they observed (as to the analysis made by the government chemists).

"There is an 18 allele spotted but it was not reported (in the chemist) report.

"DW4 and DW5' testimonies are from what they observed. The prosecution did not call any witness to rebut their evidence," he says.

3.40pm: Justice Arifin calls for a 15-minute break.

3.30pm: Ram says swabs taken should be frozen.

He points out that the anal swabs were only given to the chemists after 96 hours of the alleged incident

He says the government chemists agree that there will be degradation after 36 hours.

3.15pm: Ram says the Court of Appeal judges description of the defence forensic experts as armchair experts cannot be sustained.

"They are clearly qualified as senior scientists with over 30 years experience," he says.

Ram says Seah's testimony that she found semen samples in Saiful's anus cannot be accepted as the samples were retrieved after 36 hours.

"The DNA obtained, she claimed was in pristine condition as against to it being degraded or badly degraded."

3.05pm: Ram says the court should accept defence witness, forensic expert Brian Mcdonald's evidence as he is a competent chemist.

He says the Court of Appeal judges did not accept the defence expert’s views compared to the High Court (which acquitted Anwar).

Ram notes that the Court of Appeal judges did not consider DW4 (McDonald's) evidence and that of DW2 (David Wells (right)).

"It is pertinent that the trial judge had not criticised DW2 and DW4. The appellate judges could not appreciate the evidence as they did not see them (the foreign experts) testify."

As for the sample taken from Saiful, the defence lawyer questioned its integrity.

"The sample was taken from Saiful on June 28 and it was given to the Chemistry Department on the 30th," he says.

Ram says the samples from Saiful should be stored in a freezer but it was kept in Supt Jude Pereira's cabinet.

2.50pm: The document, says Ram, is important for the defence to show to its (defence) experts.

"None of the documents were produced although they are owned by PW5 (Seah).

"Even Seah failed to enlighten the court on the analysis. Without the benefit of doubt of the documents there is doubt on whether they conducted the tests vigorously," he says.

These documents, Ram argues, are important to ensure the guidelines are followed, on the extraction of sperm and the sperm isolation records.

"The standard documents and the SDR reports were not given. This handicapped the defence," he says.

2.40pm: Ram (right) continues with his submission and says the chemist did not do a swipe of the samples to the receptacle.

He says the chemist cannot verify how much DNA volume was collected from Saiful's samples.

Seah could not say as she does not have the records, adds the defence lawyer.

"Prosecution failed to produce the DNA volume and the sperm isolation record. These documents are not provided to the defence."

2.37pm: The hearing resumes. Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng shares a light moment with Anwar, as he opens the door of the accused dock for the opposition leader.

1pm: Ram says if the guideline says the peak is 12 percent, the Chemistry Department cannot ignore other readings or peaks that are higher.

He adds that Seah is selective in what she reported as stutters as it would reveal more parties other than 'Male Y'

"She did not report the peaks of others. She reported a peak of 13 but not a peak of 17 or 18."

Justice Arifin asks for lunch break. Court will resume at 2.30pm.

12.55pm: Ram says alleles come in pairs.

He notes that Seah (right) came to court without showing the department's guidelines.

"The end result is that the findings are unreliable," he warns.

"The documents are not provided to the defence for us to cross-examine," he reiterates.

12.45pm: Ram says everyone has a different DNA profile and there is a small likelihood that a profile is shared with somebody else.

"It is important to see and to report the correct peaks, and stutters."

"The court is not able to ascertain Seah's evidence in terms of stutters and percentage. Some of these documents are not made available to the defence for cross-examination."

He says that 12 samples were taken from Saiful and marked by Dr Siew Shueu Feng of Hospital Kuala Lumpur.

These are rectal swab, peri-anal, high rectum and low rectum swabs.

12.40pm: Several Pakatan Rakyat representatives arrive in court and among them are Kuala Terengganu MP Raja Kamarul Bahrin and Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul (right in photo).

Ram further submits on the allele and stutters as adopted by the Chemistry Department.

"It has not been accredited since 2005," he says.

Two chemists testified during the trial, namely Dr Seah Lay Hong and Noraidora Saedon.

12:25pm: Ram Karpal says there was a "Male Y" in the samples found and this was further linked to the DNA samples retrieved from Anwar's cell.

He says the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that "Male Y" is the appellant.

12.15pm: Sangeet submits there were a series of documents that were not provided to the defence.

She says there is no basis for the judge to dismiss the defence’s application to get the documents.

"This is to ensure there is equal footing and no trial by ambush," she adds.

In the early stages of the trial, Justice Zabidin did not allow the prosecution to provide the documents.

Sangeet argues there was no fair trial and the arrest was made unlawfully.

"There is a culmination of incidents that display the abuse and conspiracy against Anwar," she argues.

Now Ram Karpal begins his submission on DNA.

12.02pm: Sangeet says the original warrant of arrest tendered during the main trial was unlawful.

"The warrant was only issued at the balai (police station). The judge was wrong in ruling to accept these evidence during the main trial based on the same document (i.e. the original warrant of arrest).

"Hence the retrieval of those (three) items should also be considered illegal."

11.45am: Sangeet says there is other evidence (direct) that the prosecution has and it should not rely on circumstantial evidence.

"The prosecution cannot rely on the main trial to rebut what happened in the trial-within-trial."

11.35am: Sangeet says the trial judge ruled that the items were retrieved through unfair means.

She adds that the initial ruling was when he chose to exercise discretion but in the main trial he accepted the evidence.

"The inclusion of the items are through unlawful means. This amounts to trickery and unfairness."

The defence lawyer says the fact it was done through unfair means did not change and hence, there is no need for the trial judge to review his ruling.

Justice Mohd Zabidin, had at first not accepted the three items - towel, toothbrush and water bottle - as evidence during a trial within trial but later reversed his decision.

10.47am: However, Justice Arifin points out that illegally obtained evidence is also admissible in Malaysia.

Sangeet replies that the appellant was arrested in Jalan Segambut and met Jude at the police station at about 8pm and was taken to HKL.

"Anwar declined to give his DNA at the hospital. He was exercising his constitutional right not to do so.

"The entire procedure was wrong as it was against lock-up rules (as prisoners are supposed to be in the lock-up by 6pm)."

Sangeet says the police had detained Anwar overnight when they knew they were there only to record his statement.

"The gave him the three packets and the next morning these items were carefully removed.

"It is his legal right which is being trampled over," she says.

10.45am: Defence lawyer Sangeet says the three items were illegally obtained through trickery and deception and the arrest was unlawful.

The arrest was made without a warrant. "There was an arrest but the warrant of arrest was only issued at IPK KL. Taufik says the arrest is made based on Section 377B (of the Penal Code)."

The judge initially ruled in our favour, says the defence counsel, in not admitting the three items.

"He ruled that the items were unfairly used."

10.40pm: Sangeet says a trial within a trial was held to determine the admissibility of the three items - the Good Morning towel, toothbrush and mineral water bottle.

"(Defence lawyers) Sankara Nair and R Sivarasa (right) testified and they related how Anwar's car was ambushed (by police) in the arrest.

"One superintendent Taufik testified that they got orders to arrest Anwar. There were no grounds given by Taufik to make the arrest, who testified as the only witness in the prosecution," she says.

10.30am: Sangeet argues ‘Male Y’ could be anyone and not necessarily Anwar.

She says during the trial in the High Court, crime scene investigator (CSI) Supt Amidon gave evidence and the deputy public prosecutor (DPP) had asked for the three items to be tendered.

"However, (then lead defence lawyer) Karpal Singh objected. The admission of the three items are wrong. The High Court judge did not want to admit the items.

"However, the judge reviewed the application just before the prosecution closed its case."

10.20am: Justice Abdull Hamid asks when was the water bottle given, and Sangeet says the bottle was given during interrogation.

"You cannot use circumstantial evidence when you have direct evidence through witnesses,” reiterates defence lawyer Sangeet.

The judge asks whether there are authorities on the matter. Sangeet says there are none.

“Are you saying we should use direct evidence in preferential to circumstantial evidence?” ask Justice Abdull Hamid.

“Yes,” says Sangeet. She argues there is no link between the DNA profile of ‘Male Y’ and the appellant (Anwar).

10.15am: Justice Arifin asks whether any material was left in the cell before Anwar went into it.

Defence lawyer Sangeet refers to the lock-up diary. It shows that the lock-up was empty and there were no other detainees.

Another member of the five-member Federal Court panel, Justice Md Raus, says the three items were given to Anwar but Sangeet was asking whether they were used by Anwar.

10.10am: Defence lawyer Sangeet says the High Court judgment states a police officer saw Anwar used the cell toilet and brushed his teeth the morning of July 17, 2008.

However, Sangeet says the police officer only heard as if Anwar was brushing his teeth. He did not see it himself.

"This witness is not allude to the fact that the appellant is brushing his teeth," she argues.

There is an error of fact in this finding by the trial judge, says Sangeet.

"We have witnesses who are asked but they did not see (Anwar using those items)," she said.

"Prosecution cannot rely on circumstantial evidence when direct evidence was there - the police officer did not see."

10.05pm: Pointing to the lock-up diary, defence lawyer Sangeet says it notes that Anwar was found to be sleeping at night, waking up and leaning against the lock-up bars, and then taking ablution and performing his ‘sunat’ prayers.

Anwar was arrested on July 16, 2008 and after going to Hospital Kuala Lumpur, he spent the night at the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters lock-up.

"There is direct evidence and the prosecution cannot rely on the circumstantial evidence when there is direct evidence."

10am: Sangeet Kaur says a toothbrush, soap and towel was given to Anwar while in the lock-up.

She argues none of the evidence from the police witnesses show Anwar had used the items.

"The lock-up diary only states Anwar is in the cell and that he prays in the morning," Sangeet submits.

The three items - a Good Morning towel, toothbrush and mineral water bottle - were allegedly used by the police to obtain Anwar's DNA without his knowledge.

9.50am: It is now defence lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo’s turn to make her submission.

She says that lead defence counsel Gopal Sri Ram had submitted that Saiful is not a credible witness and she reiterates that the Court of Appeal in finding the alleged victim as a credible witness could not stand as they did not see him testify.

Sangeet adds that DNA from Anwar was obtained from items retrieved through the cell where he was in.

The prosecution had failed to link male Y to the case, she stresses.

"The court cannot rely on circumstantial position as there is direct evidence as it comes from the testimony of the police officers who were guarding the cell."

9.45am: Defence lawyer N Surendran begins his submission by citing various authorities on why statement from the dock can be of weight.

According to him, Anwar is the only person who gave a statement from the dock who is acquitted of a crime when the Kuala Lumpur High Court judge found him not guilty.

An accused have three options when defence is called - testifying from the witness dock, keep quiet or give an unsworn statement from the dock which could not be cross-examined.

"The court should consider Dr Mohd Osman's statement which was in conflict of Saiful. The Court of Appeal should give weight to Anwar's testimony in court.

"This amounts to serious misdirection which warrants the apex court intervention," said Surendran.

9.40am: Court in session with with Chief Justice Arifin presiding.

Some of those who are seated in the public gallery, including lawyers in their robes, are asked to leave the courtroom to make way for those with passes.

9.30am: Lead prosecutor Shafee arrives. In the public gallery, there is grumbling about there being not enough seats for everyone.

Also in the courtroom is Sepang MP Mohd Hanipa Maidin, who is also a lawyer. He is seen wearing the lawyer’s robe.

PKR vice-president and secretary-general Rafizi Ramli is also in the courtroom.

9.20am: The courtroom is already packed with those unable to get a seat being ushered out.
  
Anwar's lead counsel Gopal Sri Ram had indicated yesterday that he may be late and the other defence lawyers will make their submissions without him.

Lead prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah is expected to arrive soon. The proceedings are expected to start in 10 minutes.

8.57am: Anwar Ibrahim arrives in court with his wife, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and their children. He shakes hand with supporters as they pose for photographs.

Also seen with Anwar's family are defence lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya

 

8.50am: PKR vice-president and Batu MP Tian Chua speaks to the Anwar supporters gathered about 300 metres from the Palace of Justice. 

 

Tian says he had asked the police to allow them to gather in front of the court but they said no.

"Today, we are are much further away (than yesterday)," he laments.

 

The barricades have been moved further from the front of the Palace of Justice.

8.40am: Lawyers representing Anwar have started trickling in. Among them are Eric Paulsen, Sangeet Kaur Deo and Ram Karpal Singh.

Journalists are seated on the left side of the court while the international observers, who have started to arrive, are seated on the right.

The seats in the middle of the public gallery are allocated for Anwar's family members and supporters.

Yesterday, when the hearing opened, the courtroom was packed with about 80 people in the public gallery, including journalists, international observers and opposition supporters.

8.38am: Outside the Palace of Justice, some protesters attempt to break the barricades erected by the police.

They tried to topple the makeshift fence as they shouted “push, push”. About 50 police officers defend the barricades.

However, the situation came under control after Nik Nazmi urged the protesters to remain calm and not to break the barricades.

8.25am: About 300 people in red and black T-shirts, led by PKR leaders Nik Nazmi and Tian Chua, march from Tuanku Mizan mosque to the Palace of Justice about a stone's throw away.

They carry a banner bearing the words ‘Rakyat Hakim Negara’ (People are the judge of the nation) as well as ‘Justice for Anwar’ placards.

Meanwhile, another group of 200 supporters have gathered outside the court complex. The crowd size has grown to about 500.

8.20am: Already in the courtroom are deputy head of the prosecution division of the Attorney-General's Chambers Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria and Saiful's lawyer Zamri Idrus.

The court hearing is expected to start at 9.30am.

8.05am: Court staff arrive early and they go through the barricades opened by police at the back entrance of the sprawling court complex.

Some PKR and PAS politicians are already inside the building. They include Kelana Jaya MP Wong Chen, PAS vice-president Sallehuddin Ayub, PAS information chief and Pokok Sena MP Mahfuz Omar, Batu Buruk assemblyperson Syed Azman Syed Mohamad and former PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution Ismail.

8am: The number of supporters outside the Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin Mosque have swelled to 100. Among them are PKR Youth chief Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad and activists Hishamuddin Rais and Adam Adli.

Adam and four others are playing upbeat music to energise the early morning crowd.

Chants of 'Allahuakhbar', 'Reformasi' and 'Bebas Anwar' fill the air.

7.20am: Several dozen supporters of Anwar Ibrahim are gathering at the Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin Mosque across the road from the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya which housed the Federal Court - the country's highest court.

Among them are members of the Kelantan 'Royalti' NGO. Others have come from Kedah and Penang overnight via chartered buses.

Many are expecting a decision today although it is likely that proceedings may drag on for another day or so.

Like yesterday, there is heavy police presence and security is tight with key roads leading to the court complex barricaded.

7am: The final appeal against Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy conviction and five-year prison sentence and the prosecution's cross-appeal to extend the jail term meted out to the opposition leader will resume today at the Federal Court in Putrajaya.

Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria leads a five-member bench in the highly charged case, which is also closely watched by a number of international observers sitting in the public gallery of the packed courtroom.

The biggest surprise yesterday was the appointment of former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram who retired in 2010, to lead Anwar's defence team. He replaced senior lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah who has not fully recovered from his leg surgery.

The inclusion of 70-year-old Gopal in the defence team had resulted in the judges who are mostly his peers or juniors not to abruptly cut him off as they sometimes do with other lawyers, as he delivered points after points in attacking alleged victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's credibility as the key witness.

The defence is compelled to do this after the trial judge at the Kuala Lumpur High Court, Justice Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah, and a three-member bench at the Court of Appeal maintained that Saiful was a credible witness.

Among the points submitted by Gopal centred on the use of lubricant K-Y jelly during the alleged sex act, the alleged smearing of the gel on the carpet floor, Saiful's demeanour, and the possibility of impeaching the star witness for conflicts on the point of non-consensual and consensual sex.

Today, Anwar's counsel N Surendran will continue with his submissions in arguing that weightage should be given to the opposition leader's statement from the dock where he claimed of a political conspiracy against him.

This is followed by Ram Karpal Singh's submission on DNA evidence and then his sister Sangeet Kaur Deo's submission on evidence taken from Anwar's cell on July 16, 2008 to be tested for DNA.

This was after the PKR de facto leader refused to provide his DNA sample at Hospital Kuala Lumpur following allegations of tampering in Anwar’s first sodomy trial in 1998.

After the defence team has completed its submissions, it is government-appointed lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah’s turn to make his arguments. It is understood that Shafee's submissions is about 221 pages long.

The appeal may go longer than the two days initially allocated by the court to hear the case.

Shafee has mentioned in court yesterday that his prosecution team, which includes deputy head of the prosecution division of the Attorney-General’s Chambers Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria, is prepared for the trial to continue until Friday.

Malaysiakini is covering the hearing LIVE.

Malaysian woman with six gold bars held at Dhaka Airport

A Malaysian woman was detained at the Dhaka Airport for attempting to hide gold bars on her body.

FMT

NEW DELHI: A Malaysian woman with six gold bars has been detained by enforcement officers at the Dhaka Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport in Bangladesh, according to a report.

Bangladesh bdnews24.com reported that the 53-year-old woman was detained when she was going through the green channel at about noon on Tuesday.

According to the report, she was frisked after she attracted suspicion on the way she walked and the search revealed six gold bars weighing one kg on her.

The report quoted Armed Police Battalion’s Assistant Superintendent Nur-e Alam Siddique as saying that the woman came to Bangladesh on a Malaysia Airlines flight at about 11 am.

“She never came to Bangladesh before, according to the travel details on her passport. She was also not fluent in English, so we could not ascertain yet her destination in Bangladesh,” he had said.

Legal action was being taken against her, the online newspaper quoted Customs Assistant Commissioner Jewela Khanam as saying.

- BERNAMA

Hindraf scrambles to save century-old Ashram

Waytha urges Heritage Department to stop the re-development of the building.

FMT

PETALING JAYA: Hindraf Chairman P Waytha Moorthy has sent out an urgent call to the National Heritage Department to stop the proposed re-development of the Swami Vivekananda Ashram in Brickfields.

He said in a statement today that the department must “take immediate steps” to acquire and protect the building because the proposed development would “destroy the existing structure, which has been standing there for over 100 years”.

He pointed out that the building was classified as a Category 2 heritage building in Kuala Lumpur City Hall’s gazetted Structure Plan for 2004.

He also noted that the National Heritage Act allows the Commissioner of Heritage to designate a site as having heritage value and to acquire it.

Waytha said the ashram must be preserved because it “clearly fits all the necessary criteria in the form of its historic importance in Malaysian history, its social and cultural associations, its richness in exhibiting the diversity and the evolution of the multicultural social fabric of the Malaysian community.”

“The National Heritage Department has all the valid reasons to pursue with an objection to the demolition and/or change in the façade of a cultural heritage such as the Swami Vivekananda Ashram,” he added.

Under the National Heritage Act, the minister in charge has the power to provide or issue policies, statements or directives in respect of any matter or conduct on the conservation and preservation of heritage.

Under Section 40, the Commissioner of Heritage is empowered to advise and coordinate with the local planning authority in safeguarding, promoting and dealing with a heritage site.

DNA profile belonged to ‘Male Y’, not Anwar

Defence says DNA profile found in Mohd Saiful's rectum was not Anwar’s.

FMT

PUTRAJAYA: The DNA profile of a person identified as ‘Male Y’ found in the rectum of Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan did not belong to Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, the Federal Court heard today.

Submitting before a five-man bench led by Chief Justice of Malaysia Tun Arifin Zakaria, lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo said there was no evidence at all to link ‘Male Y’ to Anwar.

She explained that none of the police officers who were on duty at the lock-up saw Anwar use the three items — a toothbrush, Good Morning towel and mineral water bottle — which were given to him by the police when he was detained overnight from July 16 to 17 in 2008.

Sangeet said one police officer had told the court that he only heard a sound as if Anwar, 67, was brushing his teeth.

“He saw Anwar use the cell toilet but he did not see the appellant (Anwar) brush his teeth,” she said.

Therefore, she said it was impossible to link the DNA profile of ‘Male Y’ to Anwar because it could belong to anyone.

Asked by Arifin whether there was another person in the cell, Sangeet replied that Anwar was the sole occupant.

She argued that the prosecution only relied on circumstantial evidence that Anwar had used the items; however, the police officer never saw Anwar use them.

“The circumstantial evidence is usually relied upon when there is no direct evidence. But in this case, we have witnesses who did not see the appellant use the items,” she said.

However, Federal Court Judge Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong explained that in law, circumstantial evidence could be applied, not necessarily just direct evidence, but it could be both.

Sangeet submitted that in the High Court, a trial-within-a-trial was conducted by the court for the purpose of determining whether there was sufficient evidence for the court to exclude DNA profiling from the three items.

She said the High Court, in its ruling, had excluded the three items but reversed its earlier decision after allowing the prosecution to review the ruling and allowed the items to be tendered as evidence.

She argued that from the ruling made by the High Court to exclude the items, it was clear that it was based on unfair means and an unfair method employed by the police, meaning it was by trick and deception that the police attempted to introduce the DNA evidence.

Sangeet further submitted that the items obtained for DNA profiling by the police were by improper and unfair means as Anwar refused to give his blood sample for DNA purpose when requested by Kuala Lumpur Hospital doctors.

She said based on authorities, Anwar had constitutional rights not to do so and he was not legally obliged to provide his blood sample for DNA.

Sangeet said, instead of being released after the medical examination, Anwar was taken to the lock-up cell and supplied with the three items.

“It is significant to note that when the items were recovered from the lock-up, Anwar was not present,” she added.

The lawyer pointed out that the court should have considered what was stated in the lock-up diary as it was very detailed.

In fact, she said based on the evidence, the lock-up diary had recorded Anwar’s movement every two hours such as when he was sleeping and leaning to the cell railing.

She submitted that without the items, there was a major gap in the prosecution case and therefore, the prosecution had failed to link the DNA of ‘Male Y’ to Anwar.

At the outset, another lawyer, N Surendran submitted that the Court of Appeal had failed to consider Anwar’s statement from the dock with other evidence, in convicting the opposition leader.

Interview with an Islamic State Recruiter: 'Democracy Is For Infidels'

by Hasnain Kazim

The conditions laid out by the Islamist are strict: no photos and no audio recording. He also keeps his real name secret as well as his country of origin, and is only willing to disclose that he is Arab. His English is polished and he speaks with a British accent.

He calls himself Abu Sattar, appears to be around 30 years old and wears a thick, black beard that reaches down to his chest. His top lip is shaved as is his head and he wears a black robe that stretches all the way to the floor. He keeps a copy of the Koran, carefully wrapped in black cloth, in his black leather bag.

Abu Sattar recruits fighters for the terrorist militia Islamic State in Turkey. Radical Islamists travel to Turkey from all over the world to join the "holy war" in Iraq or Syria and Abu Sattar examines their motives and the depth of their religious beliefs. Several Islamic State members independently recommended Abu Sattar as a potential interview partner -- as someone who could explain what Islamic State stands for. Many see him as something like an ideological mentor.

He only agreed to an interview following a period of hesitation. But after agreeing to a time and saying he would name a place in due time, he let the appointment fall through. The next day, though, he arranged another meeting time, to take place in a public venue. And this time, he appears: a man with brown eyes behind frameless glasses. He seems self-confident and combative. He orders a tea and, throughout the duration of our meeting, slides his wooden prayer beads through his hands.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: As-salamu alaykum.

Abu Sattar: Are you Muslim?

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Why does that matter? Religion is a private matter for me.

Abu Sattar: Then why did you say "as-salamu alaykum"?

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Because it means "peace be with you" and I see it as a friendly greeting.

Abu Sattar: So you're not a Muslim. I knew it!

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Why is Islamic State so eager to divide the world into believers and infidels? Why does Islamic State see everything as either black or white, "us against the world"?

Abu Sattar: Who started it? Who conquered the world and sought to subordinate all foreign cultures and religions? The history of colonialism is long and bloody. And it continues today, in the shape of Western arrogance vis-à-vis everyone else. "Us against the rest of the world" is the formula that drives the West. We Muslims are now finally offering successful resistance.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You are spreading fear and horror and are killing innocents, most of them Muslim. You call that successful resistance?

Abu Sattar: We are following Allah's word. We believe that humanity's only duty is to honor Allah and his prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. We are implementing what is written in the Koran. If we manage to do so, then of course it will be a success.

For Salafists like Abu Sattar, the Koran is the only valid law. They are literalists and refuse to interpret scripture, much less to abstract from it. Abu Sattar and the Islamic State idealize the Muslim community that existed during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad, believing that it was the epitome of Islamic practice and that the religion was only able to rapidly expand for that reason. Islamic State would like to revive that interpretation and emulate the early Muslims.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Do you believe that those who behead others are good Muslims?

Abu Sattar: Let me ask you this: Do you believe that those who launch air strikes on Afghan weddings or who march into a country like Iraq on specious grounds are good Christians? Are those responsible for Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib good Christians?

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You are dodging the question. The events you speak of were not undertaken in the name of a religion and were heavily criticized in the West. Once again: What is a good Muslim for you? What kinds of people are you recruiting?

Abu Sattar: A Muslim is a person who follows Allah's laws without question. Sharia is our law. No interpretation is needed, nor are laws made by men. Allah is the only lawmaker. We have determined that there are plenty of people, in Germany too, who perceive the emptiness of the modern world and who yearn for values of the kind embodied by Islam. Those who are opposed to Sharia are not Muslims. We talk to the people who come to us and evaluate on the basis of dialogue how deep their faith is.

Turkey is seen as a key site for Islamic State recruiting. People from around the world -- from Europe, the United States and Central and South Asia -- travel to Istanbul and establish contacts with the extremists. According to Turkish officials, around 1,000 of the country's citizens are also fighting for Islamic State.

The government in Ankara denies that it is supporting Islamic State, but has in the past allowed jihadists to travel to Iraq and Syria via Turkey. There are also indications that the extremists receive food, medical supplies, weapons and munitions via Turkey and that injured terrorists have been treated in Turkish hospitals.

In the last three years, Turkey has been actively seeking the fall of Syrian autocrat Bashar Assad and has been supporting all groups fighting against him, including Islamist groups. At the very least, it tolerated Islamic State recruitment activities within Turkey.

Abu Sattar periodically glances around to see if he is being watched. He says he is able to continue recruiting, but that "a bit of restraint" is necessary.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: There are an estimated 1.6 billion Muslims in the world today. Many are very democratic, some are liberal while others are conservative and, just imagine, there are heterosexual Muslims and homosexual Muslims among them. Most of them do not share your ideology. But you act as though there were only one kind of Muslim, namely those who think like you do. That is absurd!

Abu Sattar: Democracy is for infidels. A real Muslim is not a democrat because he doesn't care about the opinions of majorities and minorities don't interest him. He is only interested in what Islam says. Furthermore, democracy is a hegemonic tool of the West and contrary to Islam. Why do you act as though the entire world needs democracy? And when it comes to homosexuality, the issue is clearly dealt with by the Koran. It says it is forbidden and should be punished.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Such statements help cast suspicion on all Muslims. In many countries, they are under pressure to distance themselves from Islamic State even though they have nothing at all to do with terror.

Abu Sattar: So? Are they speaking out against us? (Laughs) I think we enjoy much more support than you would like to believe. Those who demand that Muslims take sides are totally right. We go even a step further: All people should disclose whether they submit to Allah or not. Those who are against us are our enemies and must be fought. That includes people who call themselves Muslims but who don't lead their lives as such -- people who drink, who don't pray, who don't fast, who have constantly changing partners and who are unable to recite the Koran.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: There are many Muslims who have consciously chosen such a lifestyle.

Abu Sattar: That may be true, but that is not Allah's will. When we someday have power, inshallah, in the entire world, then Sharia will be imposed. Such people will then have to atone for their behavior.

Religious fundamentalism is as old as religion itself. Islamic State, however, is applying it with the most brutal of consequences. A self-contained worldview that clearly delineates between good and bad, friend and foe, makes it simple for its followers to find their way in a complicated world. Muslims who interpret Islam differently than the Salafists are simply declared to be unbelievers, a practice of excommunication known as "takfir." For those declared unbelievers, it is akin to a death sentence because turning away from Islam is forbidden. The extremists have also shown no compunctions about using religion to justify war crimes. In Abu Sattar's view, all means are legitimate in the fight for "true faith." It is an approach that thousands of people clearly find attractive.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You kidnap non-Muslim women and turn them into sex slaves. You crucify or behead those of other faiths, including children. How does that conform to Islam?

Abu Sattar: Why didn't anybody get upset about the many people that Syrian President Bashar Assad has on his conscience? But now that we want to establish a caliphate, it is suddenly a problem? To answer your question: It is every Muslim's duty to fight those of a different belief until only Allah is worshipped around the world. Everybody has the opportunity to accept Allah and to change to the right path. (Recited in Arabic from the Koran, 5. Sura, Verse 33) "The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land."

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Most non-Muslims aren't waging war against anybody. Billions of people, no matter what their religion, are living peacefully with each other, or at least next to one another.

Abu Sattar: (Once again recites in Arabic, this time Sura 4, Verse 89) "They (the Unbelievers) wish that you reject Faith as they have rejected Faith, and thus that you all become equal. So take not protectors or friends from them till they emigrate in the Way of Allah. But if they turn back from Islam, take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them and take neither protectors nor friends nor helpers from them."

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You are avoiding the question by confronting a complex reality with religious texts. But if you really want to conduct such an argument: It also says in the Koran that there is no compulsion in religion. In a different spot it says that one is not permitted to "transgress due balance" because God does not love imbalance. What you are doing is a transgression of balance.

Abu Sattar: Yes, that is in the second Sura. But it also says that one should kill or expel unbelievers wherever one finds them.

This is a typical strategy employed by fundamentalists: They choose those sources that support their position while ignoring those that contradict them.

Abu Sattar says that he has been responsible for "several dozen" young men joining Islamic State. He says they were strictly separated according to their countries of origins and would remain separated during their training in camps in Syrian territory. Contrary to some reports, he emphasizes that no training takes place on Turkish soil. Men with battlefield experience, such as those who fought in places like Chechnya or Afghanistan, are particularly highly valued.

Islamic State concentrates exclusively on the fight and the implementation of their version of Islam. The militias even reject mosques because they distract from faith. Monuments and works of art are likewise destroyed because they see them as idols.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: In the golden age of Islam, there was music, dancing, painting, calligraphy and architecture. Yet you are propagating an Islam free of culture and art. It is time to discuss religious content and find a modern interpretation, don't you think.

Abu Sattar: It is not up to us to interpret God's word. There have been repeated errors and lapses in Muslim societies. That which you refer to as the "golden age" was one of them.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Then you should at least be in favor of allowing people to read the Koran in their own language so that they understand how they are supposed to live. Most are unable to speak or understand Arabic. Do you believe that the many calls for fighting and killing would be well received were people to be able to read them in their own language?

Abu Sattar: It is Allah's word just as it is in the Koran. We are also not allowed to translate it. It is unimportant whether what it says is well received or not. We are not allowed to question even a single word.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You keep the people uneducated to build up your power. That is a strategy used by all extremists.

Abu Sattar: You have your viewpoint and we have ours.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: But you fight against all those who don't share your worldview.

Abu Sattar: Christians and Jews go after those who have access to raw materials but who prevent access to them. Oil is the best example. The US and its allies are constantly intervening in countries where they don't belong only to defend their prosperity. Is that any better? We aren't fighting because we are greedy and selfish, rather we are fighting for values and morals.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: When one looks at your actions in Iraq and Syria, morals and values are difficult to discern. One gets the impression that your actions are driven by an inferiority complex. The same holds true of your recruits: They tend to be people who feel like they don't belong and finally see an opportunity to live out their fantasies of power.

Abu Sattar: It is not true that only those people come to us who have experienced no success in life. Among them are many people who have university degrees, people who were well-established. But they all see the inequities that we Muslims have long experienced and want to fight against them.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You constantly speak of fighting. Do Muslims not constantly speak of Islam being a religion of peace?

Abu Sattar: It is when people submit to Allah. Allah is merciful and forgives those who follow him.

A-G draws flak for defending Ibrahim

The Star
by P. ARUNA

PETALING JAYA: The Attorney-General’s Chambers has come under criticism for its defence of the “burn Malay language Bibles” remarks of Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali.

The NGO Centre For A Better Tomorrow said the Attorney-General should publish guidelines on prosecutorial discretion to avoid being accused of selective prosecution.

The NGO, which champions moderation, said public prosecutors in England, Canada, Hong Kong and the United States already had such guidelines for serious offences and high-profile cases.

“By operating within the guidelines, the prosecutors in these countries could stand up to intense public scrutiny.

“Likewise, our Attorney-General would be able to defend his prosecutorial decisions better if such guidelines existed here.

“A case in point is the decision not to prosecute Ibrahim Ali over his Bible-burning remarks while those who uttered far less inflammatory words were swiftly hauled up,” said its co-president Lim Chee Wee in a statement yesterday.

On Monday, the Attorney-General’s Chambers said that Ibrahim’s call for the burning of Malay language Bibles “does not fall within the definition of a statement with a seditious tendency under the Sedition Act 1948” and was clearly to defend the sanctity of Islam.

Ibrahim made the statement in January last year with regard to individuals who had purportedly distributed Bibles containing the word “Allah” to students, including Malays, at SMK Jelutong in Penang.

Gerakan Youth chief Tan Keng Liang said the threat to burn the Bibles or other religious books was clearly seditious, no matter the circumstances or context.

“We understand that the A-G’s Chambers has the discretion of whether or not to prosecute the case.

“However, we are of the view that the A-G’s Chambers should not have passed judgment on the matter and should have allowed the judiciary to decide,” he said in a statement.

Council of Churches Malaysia gene­ral-secretary Rev Dr Hermen Shastri said the Attorney-General’s defence of the decision not to charge Ibrahim was unacceptable.

“It speaks about the defence of one religion, but what about other religions.

“Where does one draw the line? In a multi-racial and multi-religious society, the law should apply equally to all,” he said.

Christian Federation of Malaysia chairman Rev Dr Eu Hong Seng said the organisation stood by its earlier stand that the failure to prosecute Ibrahim would encourage ex­­tremists to take similar actions against non-Muslim communities.

MIC Youth chief C. Sivarraajh said he was surprised by the Attorney-General’s decision as Ibrahim’s statement was “clearly seditious”.

Najib: Bilateral Trade & Investment With UAE Will Further Strengthen

From Massita Ahmad

DUBAI, Oct 29 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak expects bilateral trade and investment between Malaysia and United Arab Emirates (UAE) to further strengthen in the coming years as businesses in both countries continue to engage in strategic partnerships, including in the fast-growing world of Islamic finance.

"The UAE continues to be an important trading partner for Malaysia, ranking 14th overall and first among our Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) trade partners," Najib said this at the roundtable meeting with UAE investors here today.

Najib said bilateral trade between Malaysia and the UAE in 2013 was US$8.81 billion, an increase of 11.7 per cent on the year before while total exports increased to US$4.02 billion, and imports reached US$4.78 billion.

Najib, who is also the finance minister, said UAE was the second largest GCC investor in Malaysian manufacturing sector, creating over 3,400 jobs.

UAE investors also featured prominently in the services sector; from the National Bank of Abu Dhabi in financial services to Jacob Fleming in the shared services and outsourcing sector, he said.

"Emirati multinationals have made substantial investments in Malaysia, which have greatly benefited both our countries' economies.

"Malaysia is proud to be the hosts of several distinguished projects and the various UAE representative and regional Offices.

"We are also pleased to see Malaysian firms playing their parts in the UAE's breathtaking development," Najib said.

Najib revealed that there are 50 Malaysian companies operating in the UAE, from logistics to interior design, and multiple construction projects worth almost US$5 billion.

The roundtable meeting, organised by Ministry of International Trade and Industry and Malaysian Investment Development Authority, is held in conjunction with the 10th World Islamic Economic Forum (WIEF).

Also present were Minister of International Trade and Industry, Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed and Advisor to the Prime Minister's Department, Tan Sri Dr Ir Jamaluddin Mohd Jarjis.

Najib, who is the patron of the WIEF Foundation, is here for a three-day working visit which ends Thursday.