Najib Razak to Gangster-cum-politician Mahathir I’m gonna make you an offer you can’t refuse go to jail
But eventually the ANWAR lost patience with UMNO. Najib was speaking about the Umno’s crony agenda. Not the Malay agenda. For those reasons we must do the exact opposite. Deny these so-called Malay leaders a chance to concentrate power. It’s power which they shall apply to the misfortune of the majority of Malays and to
The verdict will restore some faith to supporters and neutrals alike. It will replenish the energy lost in a man who had to stand trial against accusations that has tarnished not only his image but his family’s as well. READMORENOT NAJIB IT IS MAHATHIR AND HIS CONSPIRATOR TEAM CAN MAHATIR UNDO TO RETURN ANWAR SELF-DIGNITY,HIS FAMILY DIGNITY
Accusation is the easy exit route for UMNO. Introspection will take us back to the beginning. Betrayal is impossible without trust. We did not trust to be honest. We trusted our political class, and it continues to search for new and inventive ways to betray us again. Datuk V.K. Lingam’s former secretary, G. Jayanti, exposed … Read more DID DATUK V.K. LINGAM WROTE AN ENTIRE LEGAL JUDGMENT THEN LEAK IT TO DATO’ MOHD.ARIFF SABRI BIN HJ. ABDUL TUN DAIM ZAINUDDIN’S HITMAN
Najib the Leader of Malaysia’s most sweeping political reforms since independence.
Hindraf Chairman P.Waytha Moorthy issued the following press statement .
This is a most positive development and I personally wish to extend a hand to my brothers and sisters in Hindraf in welcoming them to this Rakyat-driven initiative to rid our nation of the cancer that is UMNO
readmore http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/hindraf-to-lend-its-strength-to-abu/___________________________________
.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak told the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) he is not comfortable calling for elections yet as the government must show his economic reforms are producing real results.
“Essentially, it’s a call you have to make on the basis of a feel-good factor, and that’s when you press the button. But of course at the end of the day it’s a rather intuitive decision,” theWSJ reported him as saying
UMNO’S DEFEAT IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN A BEDTIME STORY AND A WAKE-UP CALL. THE FORMER STARTS WITH ‘ONCE UPON A TIME…’ AND LULLS THE VOTER TO SLEEP. THE SECOND IS AN ENERGISER THAT ADDRESSES A FRESH DAWN
Sharp politician like NAJIB know that a single pompous phrase can reverse trajectory and turn a thundering cannonball into an ominous boomerang
UMNO MAHATHIRIST extremists very sure that such heinous injustice inflicted on Malaysia’s favourite son might not cause a massive backlash that may cast Umno to political oblivion?
Dr M wants to keep the political status quo
Anwar is the only man who stands between Mahathir and his dream of creating a political dynasty of hawks which would, among others, preside over the continued deviations and distortions of Articles 153 and 3 of the Federal Constitution and the New Economic Policy (NEP) at the expense of the nation.
Mahathir also has no respect for the checks-and-balances inherent in the Doctrine of Separation of Powers. He does not see the need for democracy, public accountability, transparency, respect for human rights and the right of the minority to be heard to balance the right of the majority – as in first past the post — to rule.
Mahathir has been responsible for padding the electoral rolls in Sabah with illegal immigrants and ignoring, like his predecessors, the 1963 Malaysia Agreement.
Not that Najib and Badawi have suddenly become great democrats unlike Mahathir but that’s a different story. Let’s not go there for the moment.
Suffice to say that Najib, Badawi and Anwar have been thrown together by Sodomy I and Sodomy II as unlikely allies, united by their utter contempt for Mahathir, if not the hawks.
There are indications that Umno hardliners are agitating for an appeal against Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy case acquittal, as exemplified by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s open support to complainant’s father urging the Attorney General to appeal the case. Muhyiddin was even quoted by the press to have prompted the AG on Jan 12 to consider such a request for the sake of public interests.
This move is evidently in conflict with Prime Minister Najib Razak’s claim that Anwar’s acquittal underscores the depth of his reform agenda. In an interview published by the Wall Street Journal on Jan 13, writer James Hookway writes:
“Malaysian leader Najib Razak pointed to the acquittal this week of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim as evidence he’s serious about political reforms, even inviting an election battle that could propel him out of power.”
Hookman said that Najib was “eager to paint himself as leader of Malaysia’s most sweeping reforms since independence”, and he quoted Najib as saying:
“Once the verdict was released, all of the tension surrounding the trial suddenly fell away and people suddenly realized there are more important things than just the Anwar issue, such as economic growth. What is important now is that we move forward.”
Najib then recounted the reform measures that he is in the process of rolling out, such as making the elections more transparent, reducing press censorship, limiting the power to detain without trial, etc.
Taking pride of these changes, Najib said that these could make Malaysia a new partner of the US in “promoting democratic politics and free trade across Asia and the Islamic Middle East.”
These are words of a leader who has declared his intention to seek his political objectives through the democratic path, with aspiration to win for his country an honourable place among international community of democracies.
APPEAL WILL BE IN CONFLICT WITH NAJIB’S POSTURE
In light of Najib’s posture on the Anwar issue, his deputy Muhyiddin’s call for an appeal against the acquittal seems oddly out of place, especially when world accolades are still pouring in, affirming Malaysia’s judicial decision as the right step to end a trial that has been universally condemned as blatant travesty of justice and outright political persecution.
In case Muhyiddin and his fellow hardliners are unaware, the facts presented by the prosecution in the Anwar trial are so absurdly weak and apparently fraudulent that it would have been an absolute disgrace to the country if high court judge Mohamed Zabidin Mohd Diah were to decide otherwise, ie, finding Anwar guilty.
It should have been obvious to all those who have followed the trial that, when the only evidence – the DNA – that the prosecution had counted on to support its case (apart from the complainant’s own words) was demolished by the Australian DNA expert, the entire case had virtually collapsed.
PROSECUTION CASE VIRTUALLY COLLAPSED
Dr. Brian McDonald, a reputable consultant molecular geneticist, rightly pointed out that no sperm after ejaculation could have survived for DNA identification after staying for 56 hours in the rectum and another 48 hours in the office of the police investigating officer at tropical room temperature, which was what Anwar’s alleged sperm samples supposed to have undergone prior to reaching the chemist laboratory . The fact that these samples could still be found in “pristine” condition – as described by Dr. McDonald based on the Malaysian government chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong’s DNA test report – pointed irresistibly to the fact that these were not the original swaps retrieved from the complainant’s rectum, but fresh substitutes presented to the laboratory.
In case there is any doubt on Dr McDonald’s credibility, he is a member of the Australian Biomedical Society and served as committee member of the Human Genetics Society, head geneticist officer in New South Wales, member of the Australian Forensic Science Society; and he had submitted to the court a 5-page credentials listing the books, papers and articles that he has written on the subject of DNA.
It is significant that the prosecution has failed to successfully rebutted Dr. McDonald’s evidence on DNA, neither was chemist Dr. Seah recalled by lead prosecutor, solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden, when he called the final prosecution rebuttal witnesses to give evidence for the prosecution.
Lead prosecutor Yusof had said at the outset of the prosecution case on 3 Feb 2010 that his case was based on the complainant Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s direct evidence, and Anwar’s DNA found in Saiful’s rectum. These would prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that Anwar was guilty, despite all the doctors who had physically examined Saiful had certified that they could not find any evidence of penetration.
Now that the DNA evidence has been dismantled, the case is now hinged on Saiful’s words.
How much credibility should be accorded to Saiful’s evidence? The answer is found in the prosecution’s decision to charge Anwar for consensual sodomy, instead of forced sodomy as emphatically persisted by Saiful, reflecting prosecution’s disagreement with the complainant’s claim. If the prosecutor could not believe in what Saiful says, why should the court believe him?
APPEAL IS A DEAD END
Now the crucial question: can the uncorroborated evidence of prosecution’s star witness, to whom the prosecution had expressed no confidence (as reflected in the charge), constitute proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal charge that may condemn the accused to 20 years jail?
Umno hardliners who would not let go of the judicial process to annihilate Anwar politically must first ponder this question deeply.
In the event of an appeal, will the panel of judges sitting in the court of appeal as well as the federal court, compliant as most of them are to the wishes of the political masters, be willing stoop so low as to answer in the affirmative to this question?
Even if they do, would that not make Malaysia the laughing stock of the world, causing a crisis of confidence in Malaysia’s rule of law, thus inflicting grievous economic injury to the country?
Finally, are these Umno extremists very sure that such heinous injustice inflicted on Malaysia’s favourite son might not cause a massive backlash that may cast Umno to political oblivion?
