Former judge Arifin Jaka dies

Former Court of Appeal judge Arifin Jaka, 78, passed away at the Serdang Hospital at 6.05am today.

It is not known for what he was admitted but Arifin had been suffering from diabetes. Malaysian Bar president Lim Chee Wee confirmed Arifin's death.

Arifin was the High Court judge who famously heard Anwar Ibrahim’s first sodomy trial in 2000 and subsequently sentenced the former deputy prime minister to nine years’ jail.

Although the Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, the Federal Court in a majority two to one ruling quashed the conviction and Anwar was released in 2004.

Following the Anwar trials, Arifin and another judge, Augustine Paul, were controversially promoted to the appellate court. 

The late Augustine, who heard Anwar's corruption trial, was later named a Federal Court judge. He passed away in 2010.

Prior to presiding the Anwar trial, Arifin was a civil and commercial judge who also heard the Tan Chong Motors case.

Arifin was born on Sept 30, 1933, in Rembau, Negri Sembilan, and after the Anwar case judgement he was elevated to the Court of Appeal in 2003 until his retirement.

Funeral prayers were performed at the Tuanku Mizan mosque, in Putrajaya after Zohor prayers, and Arifin was buried at the Precinct 20 Muslim cemetery in Putrajaya.

After retirement, Arifin worked as a consultant with Ringo Low & Associates at Phileo Damansara.

Rock of Gibraltar

Arifin during the Anwar verdict had described the complainant Azizan Abu Bakar as a “rock of gibraltar” in giving his testimony in court.

However, during the hearing he had reprimanded the star witness several times for “saying one thing today and another thing tomorrow”.

Despite the inconsistencies, the High Court found Anwar guilty of sodomy before it was finally overturned on Anwar’s appeal at the Federal Court.

The apex court overturned the decision in a 2-1 majority. The former Federal Court judge and Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad found evidence that the politician was involved in homosexual activities and was inclined to believe that the alleged incident at Tivoli Villa did occur.

However, Justice Abdul Hamid said the Federal Court could only convict Anwar and his adopted brother Sukma Darmawan Saasmaatdja if the prosecution had successfully proven its case beyond reasonable doubt over the alleged offences based on admissible evidence and in accordance with established principles of law.

“We may be convinced in our minds of the guilt or innocence of the appellants but our decision must only be based on the evidence adduced and nothing else,” he said.

He also held that it was not safe to convict on Azizan’s evidence, particularly as the offence was sexual in nature.

“In this case, Azizan’s evidence on the date of the incident is doubtful as he had given three different dates in three different years, the first two covering a period of one month each and the last covering a period of three months.

“He being the only source for the date, his inconsistency, contradiction and demeanour when giving evidence on the issue does not make him a reliable source.

“As such, an essential part of the offence has not been proven by the prosecution,” Justice Abdul Hamid ruled in allowing Anwar’s appeal and releasing the politician.