Surrender or be hunted, IGP tells Kita Lawan

 

Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar has urged the organisers of last Saturday's Kita Lawan rally in Kuala Lumpur to surrender themselves to the police.

"If not, we will look for them," he told a press conference in Cheras today.

“Come lah, so it won't be difficult for us to find them. They come, we will make arrests and conduct the investigation.”

The police will not name all the organizers, instead, they should come forward and be arrested, he said.

The Kita Lawan rally in Kuala Lumpur in solidarity with jailed Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim on Mar 7 attracted about 10,000 protestors.

Selangor exco member and PKR Youth chief Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad and PKR youth leader Saifullah Zulkifli have since been arrested in connection with organsing the rally.

Nik Nazmi is being remanded for three days until Wednesday under Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA).

While some argue the section used by police is unconstitutional, Khalid (right) said it cannot be declared so because the government is still appealing the decision.

"That particular issue is being appealed, so you can't say yet it is unconstitutional, until or unless it has been finalized. We have Section 143 (of Penal Code), that is being used," he argued.

The Court of Appeal ruled that Section 9(5) which requires of a formal 10-day notice before holding a protest is unconstitutional.

It ruled this in relation to the Black 505 rally in 2013, also involving Nik Nazmi.

There is no stay to date on the Court of Appeal decision.

Up to interpretation

Police were also rubbished by PKR Padang Serai MP and lawyer N Surendran, who said that it was abusing Section 143 of the Penal Code which only applies to violent assemblies with criminal motive.

However, Khalid said this was just Surendran’s interpretation.

"This is his own interpretation. I am also a lawyer, I also have my own interpretation," he joked.

"Our responsibility is to enforce the existing law, and pass it to the court (for judgment)," he added.

'Hidup Mahathir' hampir cetuskan pergaduhan

Law Speak - The royal pardon

The Sun Daily
by Gurdial Singh Nijar

RECENT events have propelled into the public domain the topic of the pardon for a criminal conviction. Several questions have emerged: Who exercises this power? How is it exercised? Who can ask for a pardon? When can it be sought? Does an application imply guilt? Can the decision to grant or reject be challenged? What is the effect of a pardon?

This article seeks to look at the applicable law and, where known, the practice in relation to pardons.

Who is given the power?

The power to grant a pardon is given explicitly by the Federal Constitution to the King – for offences committed in the Federal Territory; and to the ruler or governor of a state if the offence is committed in a state.

It is an exercise of executive power – as contrasted with the judicial functions of the courts or legislative functions of Parliament. Although executive power is vested under our constitution in the King, he is required to act on advice – either of the Cabinet or any other designated body.

The constitution has also established a Pardons Board for each of the states as well as one for all the Federal Territories. It comprises the attorney-general (or his representative), the Federal Territories minister and three other members to be appointed by the King. The King presides over the board. The board must consider the written opinion of the attorney-general before giving its decision.

The appointment of a cabinet minister seems to be at odds with the spirit of a constitutional provision which states that Parliament may make a law requiring the King to act after consultation with, or on the recommendation of, any person or body of persons other than the Cabinet – although no law has been enacted. The spirit of this provision implies that the Cabinet (which must necessarily include any cabinet member) must not be in any advisory body.

Courts often look not only at the letter of the law but, as well, its spirit to determine its reach.

In summary, the King decides whether or not to grant a pardon. He must seek the advice of the Pardons Board. Further, it is questionable whether a cabinet minister should be in the board.

Must the King act in accordance with the advice?

Does the King act in his own discretion; or must he follow the advice given by the Pardons Board?

Pre-1994 court decisions declared that it was the King's personal discretion to decide on the grant or refusal of a pardon. A 1974 Supreme Court decision declared: "Clearly the Yang di-Pertuan Agong himself exercised the power."

However, in 1994, the constitution was amended, following upon an intense contest between the rulers and the executive under Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. The power of the King to act on his own was dramatically curtailed – except in a very limited number of prescribed situations.

A new provision was added: whenever the King exercises his functions under the constitution or any federal law where he is required to act "in accordance with advice, on advice, or after considering advice", then he must accept and act in accordance with such advice: Article 40(1A).

This implies that after the amendment, the advice of the Pardons Board must be accepted and acted upon. However the relevant Article 42 – which deals with pardons – was not amended to reflect this change. And court decisions since the amendment seem to reflect the same position as before the amendment. As late as 2002, a full five-judge panel of the Federal Court approved the pre-amendment principle (cited above); as did a recent 2011 High Court case.

So although the legal position – on a straight reading of the constitutional provisions – is that the King does not act in his personal discretion, case law supports the proposition that the King has the personal discretion to decide whether or not to grant the pardon. Further, he is not bound to act on the "advice" given by the Pardons Board.

The process

There are no rules governing the process. It is not stated who should be the applicant. Nor is the form of the petition prescribed. Also, there is neither a time limit for submitting the petition; nor for the King to decide. The considerations that the King must take into account are also not stated.

This is left to be inferred from matters relevant to the grant of "mercy". The Supreme Court merely states that each case is to be decided on its own merits. The King can take into consideration matters which courts, bound by the law of evidence, cannot take into account; and he can consider public policy.

Admission of guilt?

The person convicted of a crime is appealing to the King to grant him a reprieve from the sentence. Generally and quite logically this would connote an admission of guilt.

Most cases where a pardon is sought fall in this category. Mokhtar Hashim's death sentence was commuted. A 14-year-old boy sentenced to death was instead sent to a school for delinquent juveniles. The jail sentence of Harun Idris, one-time mentri besar of Selangor, was reduced.

What if the petition for pardon is made on the basis that there has been a miscarriage of justice and that the convict is innocent? Can a pardon be given where guilt is not admitted?

There is nothing in law to say that a pardon cannot be made on this basis; or that a pardon cannot be given taking this "innocence" into account. Of course, it may be a lot harder to get a pardon on this basis. But there is no legal constraint.

The King must act "with the greatest conscience and care and without fear of influence from any quarter" – as the higher courts have repeatedly affirmed. So he can decide on the basis of the grounds of innocence set out in a petition. The King is not obliged to give any reasons for his decision; nor are reasons normally provided when the pardon is granted.

This suggests that there is no limit to the situations when a pardon can be granted on the basis of mercy.

Further, as the courts have repeatedly declared, the King does not sit as a court. He is entitled to take into consideration matters which courts cannot take into account. He can decide on his view of public policy.

So legally speaking, it is open for the petition to be considered on the grounds it refers to, including assertions of innocence and miscarriage of justice.

In these circumstances a particular petition presented on these grounds does not necessarily imply an admission of guilt.

Can it be challenged?

Whatever decision the King makes cannot be challenged in a court of law. The courts have consistently ruled that the discretion exercised is not justiciable. Nor can anything indirectly related to it be challenged – such as a delay in coming to a decision.

What is the effect?

A Harvard Law Review article, after a review of copious case law, concludes that the pardon removes all legal punishment for the offence; and if the conviction involves certain disqualifications the pardon removes such disqualifications. These accord with the provisions of our Federal Constitution which state that a member of parliament who has received a free pardon is not disqualified from being such a member. Additionally, the King is also authorised to remove the disqualification of a convicted member of parliament.

Gurdial is Professor at the Law Faculty, University of Malaya. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Trial judge ordered Anwar case evidence sealed, lawyer says

Malay Mail 
by PEARL LEE

PETALING JAYA, Feb 27 — A defence counsel in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy hearing confirmed the High Court judge had reminded the parties involved that evidence in-camera adduced by Saiful Bukhari Azlan “stay within” the courtroom. 

Gobind Singh Deo, who represented Anwar in the Federal Court appeal, said this following claims that prosecutor under fiat Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah had revealed details of in-camera proceedings during a public forum last week.

“It was clearly expressed (in the proceeding notes) by the trial judge (Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah) that such matters must not be reproduced,” said Gobind.

“As such, the attorney-general should state if his office had committed contempt of court as the order was made in the presence of then former solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden and it was pronounced in open court.”

According to the notes of the court proceedings made available to Malay Mail, Mohamad Zabidin had said: “I would like to remind parties here that today’s proceeding is in camera, that means whatever evidence adduced stays within these four walls.” 

He said although Shafee only appeared on behalf of the prosecution at the appeal level, he would have known about the matter through the records.

“Following the clarification from the Bar Council on proceedings held in camera, I now urge the presiding High Court judge in the Sodomy II trial to rule whether Shafee acted in contempt of court when he revealed the evidence.”

Malay Mail in its front page report yesterday reported Lim as urging the Bar Council to clarify its stand on Shafee’s conduct in disclosing court proceedings which were not for public consumption.

The DAP lawyer said such actions had serious implications as it affected the criminal justice system and a clarification would act as a future guide for members of the Bar.

He also said the Bar Council should refer Shafee to the disciplinary board if his actions were deemed a breach of the Legal Profession Practice and Etiquette Rules.

Shafee, had during a forum organised by Umno Youth in Kelana Jaya, said Anwar was a “closet homosexual” who cried political conspiracy only when his sexuality was exposed. It was also reported he had revealed lurid details, adduced in court, to the public. 

He had also said Anwar’s refusal to admit to his purported homosexuality made him a “dangerous man” and a threat to national security.

Shafee, who was the lead prosecutor in the appeal, had embarked on a roadshow to explain Anwar’s conviction to rebut claims of political persecution.

Anwar was sentenced to five years’ jail on Feb 10 after the Federal Court upheld the Court of Appeal’s conviction on the sodomy charge.

Efforts to contact Shafee and Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Ghani Patail proved futile.

Zahid: AG decides if Anwar can attend Dewan

The Home Minister says his deputy made an incorrect statement.

FMT

PUTRAJAYA: It is the Attorney-General’s Office, not the Home Ministry, that decides whether jailed Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim can attend Parliament, according to Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Speaking at a press conference here, Zahid expressed disapproval of his deputy’s statement yesterday that the Home Ministry could decide on the issue.

“I disagree with my deputy,” he said. “The matter should be referred to the Attorney-General. There’s no need for individual opinions, whether from among ministers or politicians.”

The deputy minister, Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar, commenting on a law professor’s statement yesterday, said Anwar must apply through the Prisons Department and Parliament if he intends to attend the Dewan Rakyat. The Home Ministry would then decide on the application, he added.

Wan Junaidi agreed with opinions that say Anwar remains in his status as a member of Parliament pending a decision on the petition for a royal pardon that his family has submitted.

Zahid said the Attorney-General would be the party responsible for interpreting Section 49 of the Federal Constitution and the provisions of related laws.

Speaker says Anwar to remain MP pending royal pardon petition

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is still a Member of Parliament pending a decision on his petition to the King for a royal pardon, parliament Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia said today.

In a statement today, Pandikar Amin said he had received a copy of the petition filed by Anwar’s wife Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and daughter Nurul Izzah Anwar this afternoon at the Istana Negara.

Pandikar Amin said Article 48 (4) (C) in the Federal Constitution allowed a lawmaker who filed for a royal pardon to keep his post, until the appeal had been dealt with.

The speaker said this being the case, he will not declare the Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat vacant.

Anwar's 14-day deadline to file the pardon application would have expired today and he would have automatically been disqualified as Permatang Pauh MP.

His daughter Nurul Izzah Anwar, who is PKR vice-president, said the petition for pardon was made on the basis that the conviction failed to adhere to the principles of justice.

"The petition for a royal pardon has been sent to the Palace," she added.

Anwar's lawyer, N. Surendran, earlier said that the opposition leader had decided not to seek a royal pardon.

"We met Anwar in prison last week and he did not give any instruction to file such an application. His lawyers, too, will not file anything to that effect," he told The Malaysian Insider.

On February 10, a five-man bench led by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria found Anwar guilty of having carnal intercourse with his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.

He committed the offence at a unit of the Desa Damansara condominium in Bukit Damansara, between 3.10pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.

The Federal Constitution states that the seat will not be declared vacant until the Pardons Board has deliberated and made a decision.

Surendran also said that Anwar's legal team would continue studying the 116-page judgment before deciding to file a review application of the ruling.

"There is no time schedule to file the review but it must be done expeditiously," he said.

Former attorney-general (A-G) Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman said nothing stopped family members of an accused person from filing a petition to the Pardons Board.

"Usually, the accused who has exhausted his legal avenue will through his counsel file the petition," he told The Malaysian Insider.

Talib said the application for pardon would be chaired by the King and the members of the board would consist of the prime minister, the attorney-general and two others.

Talib, who served as A-G between 1980 and 1993, said the board was not bound by the opinion of the present A-G although it must consider his advice.– February 24, 2015.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/speaker-says-anwar-to-remain-mp-pending-royal-pardon-petition#sthash.NPRhBr6b.dpuf

Saiful moves on, will not repeat sodomy testimony

Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's former aide who had accused the opposition leader of sodomy, said today he has no intention of repeating the testimony he had given in court anywhere else.

In a blog post, Saiful said that his testimony in the High Court previously had been recorded in the trial proceedings.

"So, the way I see it, I don't have to repeat it outside of the court. The accused (Anwar) has already been convicted and is serving his sentence," he said.

On February 10, the Federal Court found Anwar guilty of sodomising his former aide Saiful in a condominium unit at Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur, on June 26, 2008.

Anwar was handed a five-year jail term and is currently serving his sentence at the Sungai Buloh prison.

The former political aide was believed to be referring to the Umno-sponsored nationwide road show to explain the judgment in Anwar's conviction, which features the lead prosecutor of the case Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin had said that Barisan Nasional (BN) will be going on a nationwide road show, which will feature Shafee, to explain the Federal Court judgment on Anwar's sodomy case now that the judiciary process has ended.

He said that the party has been accused and criticised for orchestrating a political conspiracy against Anwar since he was first charged in 2008, but it has kept silent all these years as it did not want to be in contempt of court.

Shafee has come under severe criticism following the conviction for going on a tirade against Anwar despite his incarceration, with many saying that such actions were unbecoming of a senior lawyer and that by doing so, he had clearly acted beyond his scope as prosecutor representing the Attorney-General's Chambers in the sodomy appeal.

Saiful, 30, lamented through his blog that he has endured a tough and challenging life before and after the case came to an end in the court of law, adding that his focus now is to "survive" with his wife and child.

"I have been wallowing in this case for seven years. My life was very tough and challenging. My immediate focus is to survive, support my wife and child, build a life and keep moving forward," he said.

"Although it will be hard, I believe that blessings come from Allah. Allah is not cruel."

The former political aide said that these days, many parties were giving their different opinions about the trial and appeal proceedings that have been decided, but added that they should read and understand the judgment first before drawing their opinions.

He said many are dissecting the judgment but added that it was their right.

In the lengthy posting, Saiful also noted that while there were some people who genuinely helped him and stood up for him, there were others who did so for their own selfish reasons and political gain.

"Helping me is furthest from their minds," he said.

"There are those who believe the case is true but have purposely denied the truth to the public, for the sake of the survival of their organisations and themselves.

"And for those who do not believe this case, they will continue to attack me and will never believe despite the evidence shown. But that's alright, I will always pray that Allah will open their eyes to the truth. I am not affected nor will I bear any grudge." – February 23, 2015

Najib must stop Khairy-Shafee anti-Anwar tirade

The onus is on Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak or his deputy to deny Umno/BN’s involvement.

FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: The nationwide roadshow to character-assassinate and smear the name of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim was the brainchild of Umno Youth Leader and Minister for Youth and Sports, Khairy Jamaluddin, who announced at the first stop of the roadshow in Kelana Jaya last Tuesday that the Barisan Nasional (BN) was launching the campaign, featuring Sodomy II lead prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, to explain the February 10 Federal Court judgment as it had “kept silent for six years because the trial was in progress”.

Will the Chief Justice of Malaysia also be leading Federal Court judges to join the nationwide roadshow to justify and win in the court of public opinion on their decision against Anwar which has not found support among the majority of thinking Malaysians?

“Malaysia has become a very strange and abnormal country, where the strangest of things can happen,” said DAP elder statesman Lim Kit Siang.

Unless the Prime Minister or the Deputy Prime Minister is prepared to come out openly to deny Khairy’s claim that the BN is behind the Shafee roadshow against Anwar, warned Lim who is also DAP Parliamentary Leader and Gelang Patah MP, “Malaysians can only conclude that the Umno/BN leadership is continuing its vile and vicious vendetta against Anwar even after incarcerating him for the fourth time in his life”.

It’s not enough that a few Umno leaders have expressed reservations about Umno/BN involvement with Shafee’s anti-Anwar tirade.

It’s not enough for Deputy Finance Minister Ahmad Maslan to claim that the campaign to smear Anwar was not funded by Umno or the government.

Who is a Deputy Minister or unnamed Umno leaders to rebut the announcement and admission of a full Minister like Khairy Jamaluddin?

Lim noted that Mohd Azmi Abdul, the president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organisations, in his article in malaysiakini “Let’s stop this ‘Sodomy Politics’, now” summed up not only the objection but the repulsion of ordinary Malaysians at the depths plumbed by those in authority in the vile campaign of character-assassination against Anwar, when he asked:

“Shafee’s character assassination of Anwar at the forum, with Anwar having no opportunity to defend himself, was despicable, unethical, unIslamic and cowardly.

“How can one sink so low! The roadshow shows how disconnected Shafee and Khairy (Jamaluddin) are from the teachings of Islam, resulting in them losing their moral compass.”

In the second stop of Shafee’s nationwide roadshow on Saturday night in Permatang Pauh, the media were told that they were banned from reporting the event, which was even more unfair to Anwar as it meant that the lawyer was at liberty to say anything he liked against the jailed leader while hiding from the media.

Shafee’s roadshow against Anwar, continued Lim, to have a second bite of the cherry as he could not win in the court of public opinion, is also an admission that the Federal Court’s 5-0 unanimous opinion convicting Anwar in the Sodomy II case and sentencing him to five years jail lacks credibility whatsoever.

“Although the five Federal Court judges found Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan a credible witness, the court of public opinion does not find the Federal Court decision a credible one, which also means that the court of public opinion does not agree with the Federal Court and holds that Mohd Saiful is not a credible witness.”

The Shafee roadshow, reiterated Lim, must be halted immediately.

Jude Pereira keeps mum, wants people to judge

The investigating officer in the Sodomy II case, Jude Pereira, has refused to make any further comments apart from a handwritten account published in the Malaysia Today blog, alleging an attempt to subvert the case's trial by My Watch chairperson R Sri Sanjeevan.

Jude told Malaysiakini that he would not becommenting on the matter, and refused to answer queries on whether he had lodged a police report regarding the attempt to subvert the trial.

He also refused to respond to Sanjeevan's claims that the whole allegation was a "complete lie".

"Sorry, I am not making any more comments. Let the people judge," Jude said when posed with the queries today.

In his handwritten note, Jude claimed that Sanjeevan - who is also a PKR member - had requested him to release a press statement alleging a conspiracy in the Sodomy II investigations, which would subvert the trial.

This supposedly happened before GE13, when the case was still pending in the Court of Appeal.

Meanwhile, Sanjeevan - when contacted - emphasised that he would only be lodging a police report if Jude is confirmed as the man who made the allegations.

Jude's handling of the evidence from the scene where the sodomy tryst allegedly took place in 2008 was extensively questioned by Anwar's lawyers throughout the seven-year legal process - which ended with Anwar being sentenced to five years in prison earlier this month.

In his account published in Malaysia Today, Jude wrote that he had met both Sanjeevan and former inspector-general of police Musa Hassan over the attempt to subvert the trial.

Jude did not sign the press statement alleging the sodomy charge to be a conspiracy, as reportedly requested by Sanjeevan.

Musa had previously confirmed the incident to Malaysiakini, claiming that Sanjeevan had made the offer to Jude, but that Jude was advised against it by Musa when the two met later.

Ex-IGP, activist deny Anwar trial conspiracy claim

Businessman's account of meeting 'a complete lie' says anti-crime activist Sanjeevan

FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Anti-crime activist R Sri Sanjeevan has denied being part of an alleged attempt to subvert the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy case, while the former Inspector-General of Police, Musa Hassan, denied trying to find out about any conspiracy to convict opposition leader Anwar who is now serving a five-year jail sentence.

In a statement today, Sanjeevan described the allegations made by a businessman that he had asked Jude Pereira who is the investigating officer of the case to subvert the trial as “a complete lie”.

Sanjeevan acknowledged that he had met Pereira in April 2013, just before the general election. The meeting was arranged by Musa, then patron of the MyWatch group which Sanjeevan headed.

“I wish to state that it is a complete lie to suggest that there was an attempt to subvert the trial,” he said, according to Malaysian Insider.

“The meeting was to confirm from Jude himself whether there was a conspiracy in Anwar’s case, however, unfortunately since Jude was not willing to go on record, it ended there. I have never met nor contacted Jude since then,” he said.

The article claimed that Sanjeevan had said that he was close to Anwar Ibrahim, but Sanjeevan said Anwar had nothing to do with the meeting, adding that it was his own effort to find out the truth about the sodomy case.

“There was no attempt to subvert the trial as this meeting happened after Anwar was acquitted in January 2012 and the trial was over. I should have known better than to trust these two individuals i.e., Musa Hassan and Jude Pereira,” he was quoted as saying.

Musa was quoted by The Star as saying that the businessman’s article at Malaysia Today was wrong. He said he had met Jude Pereira but “I never asked him (Jude) if there was a conspiracy in Anwar’s case”, he was quoted as saying.

Musa said Pereira had told him later that he had met Sanjeevan and was asked to issue a statement about there being a conspiracy against Anwar, and that he had commended Pereira “when he told me that he refused to issue the press release,” The Star reported.

According to the article in Malaysia Today which was written by Raggie Jessy, Pereira related the incident where he met Musa who asked whether there was any conspiracy in the investigation against Anwar. He replied that the statements from the witnesses showed distinctly that there was not a shred of conspiracy.

Jessy’s article also mentioned that Pereira said that Sanjeevan had asked him, at a meeting in Petaling Jaya, whether he would make a press statement to say that there was a conspiracy in the investigations against Anwar and mentioned that he would be taken care of, should the opposition win the election. However, Pereira said he refused to do so as his investigations showed no conspiracy or government interference, according to the article.

Pereira told to allege conspiracy in Anwar’s case?

A report has surfaced on how Jude Pereira, the investigating officer in the Sodomy II case, had been asked to make a public statement alleging a conspiracy against Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.

Those mentioned to be involved were MyWatch chairperson R Sri Sanjeevan and former inspector-general of police Musa Hassan, who once served as the crime watchdog’s patron.

Speaking to Malaysiakini, Musa confirmed that he had met Pereira just before the last general election in 2013 at the former police chief’s house in Petaling Jaya.

The former police chief said he was later informed that the deputy superintendent (DSP) had been asked to make a press statement in Anwar's favour.

However, he denied asking the DSP if there was a conspiracy in the opposition leader's case as alleged in the article published by Malaysia Today blog, which quoted Pereira.

"We talked about old times and regarding how Pereira wanted to be a practicing lawyer. I also told him that Sanjeevan wanted to meet him.

"Pereira later told me that he met Sanjeevan and the latter asked him to issue a press release about there being a conspiracy against Anwar," he added.

Musa said when Pereira told him that he refused to do so, he had commended the police officer for making a stand.

The former IGP also revealed that he parted ways with Sanjeevan because the latter was too involved in politics.

"I told him to quit politics and focus on the NGO. He didn't do it, so I left (MyWatch)," he said.

Responding to a question, Musa confirmed that Sanjeevan was close to Anwar. Contacted later, Sanjeevan declined to comment on the matter.

Last Tuesday, Anwar was convicted of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan and sentenced to five years' jail.

In the Malaysia Today article, Pereira's alleged handwritten account on his meeting with Sanjeevan stated that he was promised to be “taken care of” should Pakatan Rakyat win the election and that he also spoke to Anwar on the phone.

The full version reads:

“I met Sanjeevan at the coffee house within the lobby of PJ Hilton. He was sitting at a table and looked preoccupied with some documents. As I got acquainted with him, he told me that he was assisting DSAI (Anwar) in the coming general election, and that it was going to be a sure win for PKR.

“He informed me that DSAI was campaigning in Ipoh at the moment. Sanjeevan was very direct. He asked me whether I would make a press statement to say that there was conspiracy in my investigations against DSAI. He told me that I would be taken care of should PKR win.”

“I told Sanjeevan that I could not make such a statement, as my investigations showed no conspiracy. Then he asked me whether I can just say that there was government interference during investigations, to which I responded in the negative too.

“I then suggested that if they wanted me to help out in any way, at best I could say that I respected the High Court’s decision to acquit DSAI and wished him well. Sanjeevan then proceeded to call DSAI with his hand phone and informed DSAI that I was there with him. He then gave the phone to me, requesting that I talk to DSAI.

“I just wished DSAI well for the elections and told him that I was not able to say what Sanjeevan had wanted me to say, but that I would just mention that I respected the Courts decision in his (DSAI’s) case. DSAI replied that it was alright and good enough for me to say just that.”

“Sanjeevan than suggested that he would write down something mild for me to say to the press in support of DSAI, and that he would call the press in the morning should I agree. He then asked me to go to a new hotel in KL Central and meet a person who would show me what he had written on my behalf, which I was to give to the press the next morning.

“Sanjeevan also told me that I would be well protected in the hotel and that I can stay at the hotel for the night, all on the house. Just out of curiosity I decided to go and see how far it is going to go.

“I reached the new hotel at KL Central at about 8 pm. At the lobby, I met a bearded Indian Muslim man and another person sitting at a table. I introduced myself and said that I was with Sanjeevan earlier, and that I was to see them. They told me that they were assisting DSAI in the elections.

“The bearded man had already drafted a letter and asked me to read it, and that if I had agreed to it, they would call the press in the morning. I was completely shocked after reading a passage of about 100 words, which said that I was the Investigation Officer and that DSAI was innocent and was charged unreasonably, with evidence fabricated against him.

“The passage made me look like a fool and would have thrown my integrity down the drain after all my hard work. I refused to subscribe to their request and just walked away from the hotel.

“I drove back to my house in Ipoh the very same night, regretting that I had ever met Sanjeevan and his friends, who intended to exploit me for their needs. Later on that same day, TS Musa texted me and asked me how my meeting went.

“When I told him what had happened, he texted me in reply saying that I did the right thing in safeguarding my integrity.”

No political motive in Nurul Nuha leading ‘free Anwar’ campaign, says Wan Azizah

Amid speculation that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's second daughter Nurul Nuha Anwar may be picked as PKR's candidate to contest the Permatang Pauh by-election, her mother Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail said their daughter was merely heading the campaign to free her father.

Dr Wan Azizah, who is PKR president, said when the family launched the campaign to free Anwar three days ago, they wanted someone who was not politically connected or politically motivated to head it.

"So Nurul Nuha is the head of the campaign, which is organised on a humanitarian basis. It is not a political movement, but one done by a non-governmental organisation.

"Speculations always happen... You can always speculate," she told reporters after a Permatang Pauh division meeting at Yayasan Aman in Penanti this evening.

Since Nurul Nuha was chosen to lead the campaign, which was launched three days ago, it has been hotly speculated that she would be picked as PKR's candidate for the by-election once Anwar's Permatang Pauh seat is declared vacant.

Dr Wan Azizah also said the party has not discussed the by-election.

"Anwar is still the MP until the Election Commission disqualifies him. Then, we will have the by-election.

"We are confident that we will continue our struggle. Permatang Pauh is the foundation of our struggle," she said.

On whether Anwar would seek a royal pardon to get out of jail, she said his lawyers were still studying the option.

She maintained that her husband was innocent and seeking a royal pardon would have connotations that he was guilty.

On Tuesday, Anwar’s appeal against his sodomy conviction and five-year jail sentence was dismissed by the Federal Court.

Dr Wan Azizah, who visited her husband at the Sungai Buloh prison yesterday, said Anwar had lost weight after just four days in jail but his spirit remained high.

"He was in great spirit, remarkably. I felt very encouraged... he was thin but when he spoke, he showed he still has his strength and spirit.

"Alhamdulillah. That gives us, our friends and supporters strength too when we know he is okay. It is not easy at his age, or at any age," she said.

Dr Wan Azizah also said Anwar was deeply saddened when told of the death of PAS spiritual leader Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat.

"Nik Aziz helped him and advised him a lot over the years. Anwar said losing Nik Aziz was like losing a shining star in the night sky," she said.

Dr Wan Azizah is due to speak at a tribute ceramah for Anwar tonight at the Seberang Jaya expo site with other Pakatan Rakyat leaders. – February 14, 2015.

Blaming Karpal for Anwar’s downfall is ‘utter rubbish’

Gobind Singh Deo tears into lead prosecutor Mohd Shafee Abdullah’s accusation saying the opposite is true.

FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Gobind Singh Deo, son of the late Karpal Singh, today lambasted Mohd Shafee Abdullah, lead prosecutor in Anwar Ibrahim’s recent sodomy trial, for suggesting that his father “threw the first stone” against Anwar.

Describing Shafee’s allegations as “utter rubbish” and “the lowest of low,” the Puchong MP invoked Hansard, the official parliamentary record of proceedings to set the record straight.

He pointed out that various allegations, including that of sexual misconduct, were first made against Anwar in 1997 and that in keeping with his duties as MP, Karpal had called for an investigation into the matter and action to be taken against the perpetrators in the event that investigations showed the allegations to be without basis and politically motivated.

According to Gobind, then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed had described the allegations as ridiculous and slanderous and said, “penyebar khabar angin, termasuk mengenai perletakan jawatan Menteri Kewangan ‘sepatutnya ditembak’” (those spreading rumours including of the resignation of the Finance Minister “ought to be shot”).

Then Attorney General Mohtar Abdullah had also classified the allegations as baseless and said that no action would be taken in the matter, Gobind added.

Gobind pointed out that despite this, Anwar was dismissed as Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister and thereafter charges of sexual misconduct and abuse of power were preferred against him.

“Mr Karpal has explained time and again, even in Parliament that owing to the events described above, he believed that Anwar Ibrahim was a victim of a political conspiracy and that Anwar Ibrahim was innocent of those accusations thrown against him,” Gobind’s statement said.

Gobind continued that it was his late father, who by raising the matter in Parliament in 1997, pinned the then PM and AG down to their declarations of innocence for Anwar Ibrahim against all the allegations levelled at him.

“This made them look like absolute fools when they later came out to support and pursue charges in respect of the same allegations they had earlier declared to be baseless against Anwar Ibrahim, shortly after his sacking as DPM,” Gobind said.

He added that by doing this, Karpal had “struck at the heart of the matter” for the question was raised later as to how a man declared innocent one day could become guilty the next, “what more only after a political storm with his master?”

Gobind explained that this had become the basis for a defence of “political conspiracy, bad faith and persecution against Anwar Ibrahim.”

Karpal went on to defend Anwar against charges of sodomy preferred against the later in 1999, for which Anwar was acquitted.

Gobind said that the acquittal served to prove that Karpal was right all along.

Apex court: Five years jail for Anwar 'not excessive'

The full written judgment convicting opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim of sodomy with a prison sentence of five years was today made available on the Federal Court's official website.

The 116-page judgment was written by Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria and is signed by him along with four other members of the bench in a unanimous decision.

The other judges were Court of Appeal President Justice Mohd Raus Sharif and Federal Court judges, Justices Suriyadi Halim Omar, Abdull Hamid Embong and Ramly Ali.

On Tuesday (left), the apex court had only initially issued a 56-page brief of the judgment when delivering its decision.

Justice Arifin in his full judgment said the five-year jail sentence meted onto the opposition leader was not excessive.

“Taking into consideration the seriousness of the offence and the fact that the appellant had taken advantage of his position as an employer of the young victim, the five-year sentence is not grossly excessive.

“We are of the view that if at all the Court of Appeal erred, it was more on the side of leniency,” he said.

On the cross-appeal by the prosecution to enhance the sentence, Justice Arifin said it was inadequate to warrant the apex court's intervention.

“We therefore dismiss both the appeals and the cross-appeal. The sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal is hereby affirmed,” he ruled.

Major points

Anwar was found guilty of commting the offence on his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at a Kuala Lumpur condominium on Jan 26, 2008.

The major points of today's full written judgment are as follows:

• Complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan is a credible witness.
   
• Investigating officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira was transparent in cutting open the plastic bag containing the Saiful's DNA samples as retrieved by the Hospital Kuala Lumpur.
   
• These DNA samples sent to the Chemistry Department on June 30, 2008, remained intact or undisturbed.
   
• The DNA samples retrieved from Anwar Ibrahim's cell on July 17, 2008 were not illegally obtained.
   
• The trial High Court judge applied the wrong standard of test in not accepting DNA evidence by the local chemist following testimonies by the defence's foreign experts.
   
• There is nothing to discredit the evidence of the local chemist.
   
• The Pusrawi Hospital doctor who first examined Saiful was not a credible witness following his assertion that plastic was inserted into the victim's anus.
   
• The Court of Appeal applied the correct test in dismissing Anwar's allegations of a political conspiracy following the opposition leader's unsworn statement from the dock.
   
• Comparing the samples retrieved from Saiful and that from Anwar's cell, 'Male Y' is identified as the opposition leader.
   
• Spine specialist Dr Thomas Hoogland's evidence that Anwar cannot perform such sexual acts is misconceived.

'IGP should probe the whole world then'

 

"IGP, please investigate the whole world then!"

Such were the tone of remarks by two opposition leaders when asked about Inspector General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar's recent threat to probe their comments on the Federal Court's verdict on Anwar Ibrahim.

On Tuesday, Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria, and four other Federal Court judges, unanimously upheld the Court of Appeal's decision to sentence Anwar to five years jail for sodomy.

When contacted, PKR national deputy youth chief Dr Afif Bahardin and PSM secretary-general S Arutchelvan said they had yet to receive any calls from the police.

But the duo remained unfazed,  saying they were prepared for police action.

"My views questioning the credibility of the Malaysian judiciary are shared by many, including international leaders," Afif, who is also a Penang executive councillor told Malaysiakini.

"The IGP appears to have nothing better to do. He may as well probe the whole world because many are questioning the court's decision to jail Anwar," added the Seberang Jaya assemblyman.

Afif was referring to the international outcry by world leaders and human rights NGOs against Anwar's incarceration, as this is the second time the opposition leader has been imprisoned for charges related to sodomy.

Prime Minister Najib has maintained that the courts are independent, dismissing allegations that charges against Anwar was "politically motivated" to end his political career.

But Arutchelvan (right) said that the whole country shares his views that the charges and Tuesday's conviction on Anwar - the Permatang Pauh MP - were "politically motivated".

He said even BN leaders were mostly "silent" about the court's verdict as they may have felt uneasy about the matter.

"It looks like the IGP merely wants to instill fear in the nation, so that he can stop us all from criticising the government.

"He should probe the whole country and even the world which sees Anwar's jailing is to end his political career.

"Even Amnesty International deems Anwar as a prisoner of conscience. How about that, IGP?" he asked.

Khalid also wants to haul up Jingga 13 chief Fariz Musa for allegedly calling on Anwar's supporters to overthrow the government through street protests.

But Fariz said he was merely referring to possible programmes planned by PKR or Pakatan Rakyat to seek Anwar's freedom.

"I did not mean separate rallies to overthrow the government.

"The police have not contacted me yet but I am prepared for it," he added.

In an interview with The Sun published today, Khalid (left) was quoted as saying "I have issued the warning; now it is time to enforce the law against those who breach and attempt to breach public order.

"They will be investigated for instigating the people to take to the streets,” Khalid had reportedly said.

Already political cartoonist Zunar.  real name Zulkiflee SM Anwar Ulhaque, is being remanded until Saturday.

Police are also investigating on PKR vice-president and secretary general Rafizi Ramli and Taiping MP, Nga Kor Ming under the Sedition Act.

Oust BN for Anwar’s sake, says Ariff Sabri

The Raub MP calls on opposition supporters to begin by ensuring a win in Permatang Pauh.

FMT

PETALING JAYA: Raub MP Ariff Sabri believes that the government will be adamant on keeping Anwar Ibrahim in jail even if one million Malaysians sign a petition for his release and even if world leaders intervene.

“I believe the government will not budge,” he says in his latest blog posting. “They will say this has been the outcome of a lengthy legal process.”

He also speculates that Anwar will not ask for a royal pardon. “Anwar Ibrahim will never entertain such an idea, I think. Asking for a pardon would amount to admitting that the crime for which he was accused and now sentenced did take place.”

Ariff believes that it is more important for Anwar to “affirm and fortify” his innocence.

However, he acknowledges that he can’t be certain whether Anwar and his family think the way he does. It may be more important for them to secure his personal freedom, he says.

Commenting on the judgment on Anwar’s sodomy case read out at the Federal Court last Tuesday, Ariff says, “It sounded like a prosecution monologue.”

Ariff says he shares the grief felt by Anwar and his family, but he seems resigned to accepting that Anwar will remain in jail unless the current ruling regime is overthrown.

“I think we have no more legal recourse,” he says. “We must do it the political way. Maybe Najib can be thrown out earlier.

“We kick out Najib and his gang. They will then know that life as they have known before, consisting of private parties and soirees, gallivanting on private and government owned jets, thriving on governmental dishonesty and incompetence, will come to an end.”

He says the process of overthrowing Najib’s regime should begin with the upcoming Permatang Pauh by-election and climax at the next general election.

“Once we have power, we can do so many good things,” he writes. “We want to fight corruption, we can do something. We want to reform the judiciary? We can do that. We want to allow cooperatives and village economic outfits to issue bonds? We can do that too. Why not? If the government can guarantee one RM1 million paid-up-capital company to issue bonds 40,000 times over, we can do the same with farmers’ co-ops and village economic co-ops.

“Elect a new government. We will enforce the law on troublesome NGOs, be they formed by Malays or non-Malays. Tangkap semua in accordance with the law.”

He calls on Pakatan Rakyat supporters to ensure that the Permatang Pauh seat remains with the coalition.

“If we all support Anwar as we claim to do, we must pitch all our efforts to make sure Permatang Pauh remains with Pakatan. I am certain that we will spare no efforts to achieve this.

“Umno, in particular, says that it’s ready to take Permatang Pauh. They have been preparing since the Court of Appeal sentenced Anwar guilty last year. Bear in mind, when Umno says it’s ready, it means they are ready in talk only. What has Umno done in Penang? Nothing much.

“Secure Permatang Pauh to show we stand in solidarity with Anwar. Stand by Anwar, in good and in bad times.”

Ariff also commented on a news report about a Malay scholar being offended because some Anwar supporters carried posters depicting the legendary Justice Bao Zheng of ancient China.

“Justice Bao is a symbol of justice,” Ariff says. “Let me repeat: a symbol of justice. I will leave it to readers to assess a person who is easily offended and yet calls himself a scholar. He must have been trained at some secluded ‘falsampah’ school.” (“Falsampah” is his contraction of two Malay words meaning “philosophy” and “rubbish”.)

He says he has a simple response to the scholar: “Learn to accept it. The Chinese civilization is 4,000-5,000 years old compared to how long is the Malay civilisation?

“I seem to recall that Malay civilisation started only after an Indian prince by the name of Parameswara founded Melaka in the 15th century. Before that, Malay civilisation was a Hindu-centric civilisation.

“So what if another civilisation is older than ours and its accomplishments therein are far more accomplished than ours? It does not diminish my Malayness at all to acknowledge a more universal symbol of justice than my own. If there is a symbol of Malay justice, please show it to us so that we can make posters of him.

“We have no future if we have this kind of mentality.”

Umno will regret its Anwar ‘vendetta’ in GE14, says WSJ

Malay Mail online

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 — In an opinion piece today, financial daily Wall Street Journal (WSJ) criticised the Federal Court’s decision to convict Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy, calling it a “Pyrrhic victory” for ruling party Umno.

In its bid to stop Anwar from becoming a prime minister, WSJ said Umno had damaged Malaysia’s reputation and the fabric of society, both of which will return to haunt the ruling party in the next general election.

“Umno’s decades-long vendetta against Mr Anwar has brought discredit on Malaysia’s government and political culture,” said the article titled “Malaysia’s Anwar Shame”.

“It is likely to accelerate the ruling party’s loss of support from a maturing population repulsed by such dirty tricks. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s failure to call an end to this farce is a stain on his legacy.”

According to WSJ, Umno had resorted to a trumped-up charge against Anwar recycled from the playbook of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, rather than fight Anwar “fairly”.

“In both cases, the allegations against Mr Anwar arose as he was poised to wrest power from Umno,” said WSJ.

“In 1998, he created the ‘Reformasi’ movement that challenged government corruption and cronyism. In 2008, he established an opposition coalition that won 48 per cent of the popular vote and came close to forming a government with defectors from the ruling coalition.”

Shortly after Anwar was delivered the guilty verdict on Tuesday, a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) was released, hailing the “independence” of the judiciary and pointing out that there have been many rulings against senior government figures.

Critics later questioned the PMO’s quick release of its response to the conviction, claiming that it suggests the possibility of collusion between the government and the judiciary.

Anwar had also accused the Federal Court of being on the “dark side” for upholding his conviction of a sodomy charge that he maintained was politically motivated.

In delivering its verdict, the Federal Court said that Anwar’s claim of a political conspiracy in his second sodomy charge remains unproven and is not credible defence.

According to a press summary of its decision, the country’s top court also pointed out that Anwar’s political conspiracy allegation was given in an unsworn statement, which meant that the prosecutors and trial judge could not quiz him on his claim.

Only 2 options for Anwar to be a free man again

Following Tuesday's Federal Court decision jail Anwar Ibrahim five years for sodomy, the oppositon leader is now left with two legal options to set aside the conviction.

The first is to file for a judicial review asking the Federal Court to reconsider its decision to convict and sentence him.

The second is for him to seek a pardon from the ruler of the state or territory where the sodomy offence occurred. In this case, it being the Federal Territory, the ruler would be none other than the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

Anwar's (left) counsel Ramkarpal Singh when contacted said they have yet to decide on filing for a judicial review.

“We have to study the full grounds of the judgment first. Then we can make a decision,” said Ramkarpal - who is also the Bukit Gelugor MP - when contacted today.

Another of Anwar's lawyers, N Surendran, said they will announcing further legal steps to be taken by Anwar's defence team.

“We will make an announcement soon,” he said when asked whether Anwar would seek a pardon.

Feb 24 deadline

Yesterday, Bernama quoted a law professor from Universiti Utara Malaysia as saying a royal pardon was one option available.

Several local media reports since then have claimed that Anwar would not be seeking a pardon.

Malay daily Berita Harian quoted senior PKR leader and lawyer Sivarasa Rasiah as saying the issue (of a pardon) 'does not arise'.

Normally, a royal pardon or clemency from the King (below) is the last option available to a convicted person to set aside his or her sentence.

The appeal for it has to be done within 14 days of the court passing the sentence.

Anwar, therefore, has until Feb 24 to file his appeal for a royal pardon in order to set aside his jail sentence and remain as Permatang Pauh member of Parliament.

Observers,
however, point out that Anwar had declined to seek a royal pardon when he was imprisoned in 1999 for abuse of power.

In seeking a royal pardon, the convict's lawyers will have to write to the Pardons Board whose current members include the present Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail.

Among the politicians who had successfully sought royal pardons following their convictions was former Umno Youth chief and Selangor menteri besar, the late Harun Idris, who
was found guilty of corruption in the 1970s.

Anwar in good spirits

Padang Serai MP Surendran, meanwhile, said he, along with PKR central working council member Latheefa Koya, met Anwar at the Sungai Buloh prison earlier today.

He said the opposition leader remains resolute and was in good spirit despite being subject to harsh prison conditions.

“Anwar thanked Pakatan Rakyat leaders and all Malaysians throughout the country for their support and concern. He also noted the concern expressed by the major international
powers on his jailing,” said Surendran (left).

Anwar was sentenced to five years' jail after the Federal Court unanimously found him guilty of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at a Kuala Lumpur condominium on June 26, 2008.

Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria took two hours to read the judgment in which he ruled there was overwhelming evidence that Saiful was sodomised by the accused as proved by the substantial scientific and corroborative evidence.

 

Kit Siang: M’sia in the doghouse after Anwar

DAP veteran has a dream despite setbacks for the country and the Opposition Alliance.

FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia is in the international doghouse again over the rule of law, democracy and human rights, a terrible ordeal for the country after it recently secured a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council and was elected as chairman of Asean.

“The 5-0 unanimous decision of the Federal Court on Tuesday in rejecting Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal was a disservice to Malaysia’s international reputation and its Vision 2020 for developed nation status,” said DAP elder statesman Lim Kit Siang.

He was lamenting the fact that Anwar will be 72 years before he is released. “He will be disqualified from holding elective office for another five years after his release, unless the Umno/Barisan Nasional (BN) government is toppled in the 14th General Election.”

The unprecedented statement from the Prime Minister’s Office, minutes after Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria announced the court’s unanimous rejection of Anwar’s appeal, but before sentencing had been announced, added Lim, only escalated national and international doubts about whether there was true independence of the Judiciary and rule of law in the country.

The heart-rending scenes of Wan Azizah Ismail, Nurul Izzah and her five siblings, and Anwar’s grandchildren in the Federal Court when Anwar’s appeal was dismissed and the sentence passed, continued Lim who is also DAP Parliamentary Leader and Gelang Patah MP, brought back similar heart-breaking memories 17 years ago in the Federal Court in Kuala Lumpur.

At that time, he recalled, the victim of persecution was Lim Guan Eng, then MP for Kota Melaka, who was being punished for championing the rights of a 15 year-old Malay girl in Melaka. “He lost his final appeal and was immediately sent off to Kajang Prison to serve his 18-month jail sentence.”

The whole Lim family was in court, said Lim in walking down memory lane, “but we were utterly helpless like Azizah and her family in the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya on Tuesday”.

“The battle for justice, freedom and human dignity, the causes which Anwar had dedicated his entire life, must burn stronger in the hearts and souls of all Malaysians until such injustices and abuses are nightmares of the past.”

He reiterated his take at the “Rakyat Hakim Negara” dinner in Petaling Jaya on the eve of the Federal Court decision on Anwar’s case, that “Pakatan Rakyat (PR) was the embodiment of Anwar’s greatest success in the national agenda for change”.

PR scored unprecedented victories first in the 2008 and then in the 2013 General Elections, said Lim. “Anwar was denied his destiny as the 7th Prime Minister of Malaysia because of an undemocratic electoral system. PR secured 52 per cent of the national vote.”

The three allies in PR — DAP, PKR and PAS — as well as countless NGOs and NGIs (Non-government individuals) who had given unstinting support to PR in the past seven years, pleaded Lim, “must all be prepared to walk the last mile to ensure the success of the Opposition Alliance”.

“Let me repeat the pledge I made on behalf of DAP on the eve of Anwar’s third incarceration”.

”We do not hide the fact that PR is afflicted with our greatest crisis since our formation seven years ago, even more challenging than the first crisis PR faced in September 2011, which nearly led to the end of PR.”

If PR had broken up over the hudud controversy in September 2011, reminded Lim, then the historic result of the 13th General Elections in May 2013, which saw PR winning 52 per cent of the electoral vote and reducing Najib’s Federal administration into a minority government, would not have been achieved. “PR won 89 Parliamentary seats and 229 state assembly seats outside Sarawak.”

“If PR now breaks up before the next polls, it is anybody’s guess as to what would be the outcome in the 14th General Elections to be held in three years’ time,” warned Lim.

“It is precisely because PR embodies the hopes of generations of Malaysians for change and Malaysia’s rendezvous with greatness, that DAP leaders are prepared to walk the last mile to make Pakatan Rakyat work.”

This, continued Lim, is also the common sentiments and commitments of PKR and PAS leaders on the unprecedented promises and challenges presented by the PR experiment.

PR’s greatest tribute to Anwar is its two fundamental principles.

“PR can only sustain and succeed if we adhere to two fundamental principles which had been the secrets of PR’s success in the past six years.”

The first, he said, was strict adherence to the PR Common Policy Framework which had formed the bedrock common principles of the three parties in the alliance.

The second, he said, was the operational principle of consensus in the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council as the highest policy-making body for PR.

“The greatest tribute we can pay to Anwar, starting on his third incarceration, was to reaffirm these two fundamental principles which held the secrets of PR’s success,” said Lim. “It will lead PR from strength to strength.”

“Our political opponents in Umno/BN fear most, and are trying their utmost to destroy, PR’s integrity and viability based on the two fundamental PR principles.”

Anwar has 14 days to seek pardon from Agong

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has discussed the pardon application with Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.

FMT

GEORGE TOWN: Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, incarcerated Tues on a sodomy charge, will automatically lose all his positions unless he files for a pardon from the Agong within 14 days.

Besides being Opposition Leader, these positions include Permatang Pauh MP, de facto leader of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), head of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and Economic Adviser to the Selangor Government.

DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng, in stressing these areas, read out Article 48 (1) of the Federal Constitution which states the conditions under which an MP would be disqualified.

“So, we must wait until the Agong accepts or rejects his petition,” said Lim who is also Penang Chief Minister and Bagan MP.

He conceded that “it all depends on whether Anwar wants to seek a pardon from the Agong.” Anwar has consistently maintained that he’s innocent of the charges.

Lim disclosed that he has discussed the possibility of a pardon with Anwar but declined to the contents of the discussions. He stressed that his party would stand solidly behind Anwar and his family.

DAP is expected to concede if PKR President Wan Azizah contests in Permatang Pauh and wins the seat. In that case, she would be appointed Opposition Leader.

Pakatan Rakyat will meet on Fri to discuss the jailing of Anwar and its implications on the three-party Opposition Alliance.