PKR slams erroneous news report for trying to do a 'hatchet job' on Anwar

I am responding to the Asia Sentinel report 'Did Malaysia’s Anwar Say Too Much’ (scroll below).

There are several glaring mistakes in the report. John Berthelsen the author has made some amendments to the original report but I believe it is important to note that there other glaring mistakes including the underlying insinuation of the report.

In the first version of the report, the author wrote: He served six years before he was pardoned on the sexual perversion charges." [para. 2]

It has since been amended to: “He served six years before the sexual perversion charges were overturned.”

The fact is that Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy conviction was overturned by the Federal Court on 2 September 2004.

The more contentious part of the report was this paragraph, where the author originally wrote:

“Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar’s condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, he admitted that “he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it” to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act.

“That sentence would tend to invalidate any assumption that the then-60-year-old Anwar suddenly forced himself on the 24-year-old aide. If, as Anwar says, Saiful brought the lubricant with him, it would certainly indicate that Saiful knew what he was getting into when he went to Anwar’s condo that night.

“This in turn is hardly helpful for Anwar, who is on trial for his political life in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur over the allegations, because Saiful’s statement has the ring of truth to it. If you are going to make up a story about being forced into a sex act, you would hardly acknowledge that you voluntarily lubricated your own anus.”

[paras. 3-5] The first ‘he’ in para. 3 has been amended to Saiful as it was not apparent on whether the pronoun was referring to Anwar or Saiful in the first version.

But there are other glaring mistakes in the report that have not been amended. In para. 4 it was mentioned that Saiful went to the condo at night when Saiful went to the condo at about 2.30 pm.

The insinuation by the author was also that Anwar was alone, waiting for Saiful. Anwar was in a meeting with a group of economists for a briefing. None of them were called upon by the prosecution as they would confirm Anwar was with them for the briefing. The defence are calling them as witnesses.

The defence also has repeatedly reaffirmed that Saiful was not in the particular condo unit. What the prosecution has done has to prove that Saiful was in the elevator and stopped at the same floor as the condo unit. But none of those with Anwar saw Saiful coming in and the prosecution has also not produced any evidence on the contrary.

The curious report, which includes the Lee Kuan Yew statement leaked by Wikileaks that Anwar walked into a trap seems to have the objective of confirming the former Singapore PM’s statement. Unfortunately it is littered with glaring mistakes obvious to anyone who has been following the trial closely and objectively.

Anyone who has read Anwar’s defence statement will see that every notion of a fair trial has been ignored in this obvious case of political persecution.

- NIK NAZMI NIK AHMAD IS THE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR OF PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT