What if the verdict on Monday is: “Anwar Ibrahim not guilty”? You can call this wishful thinking by Anwar’s sympathisers. Some will say stop dreaming.
From the Palace of Justice and halls of Putrajaya there will be echoes: “We told you so, the judiciary is independent.”
Can you imagine the editorials following a ‘not guilty’ verdict? A different song will be sung and the commentators will have a field day going on another spin that the government and the judiciary have always been fair.
A ‘not guilty’ verdict may also change the whole political landscape as Anwar may cease to be seen as a martyr. The sympathy factor may vanish.
Could it hurt Pakatan Rakyat or BN? Will BN be able to regain lost ground after several recent corruption claims that implicate the government and cabinet? Eventually, it’s how the voters perceive it.
All Malaysians hope that a fair and transparent judiciary will announce a verdict that will make Malaysia proud of its independent judiciary.
If it’s a ‘not guilty’ verdict, it may come with conditions. According to a lawyer, Anwar may receive a conditional discharge not amounting to an acquittal. He may be set free, but the case may be reopened if any further evidence is uncovered by the prosecution.
“The semen,” he quipped, “may be found in another anus somewhere, and there is no telling how long a new case will drag on.”
Meanwhile, the prosecution’s appeal may see the case going for another long-drawn battle.
Will sanity prevails?
Of course, a favourable verdict will see the former deputy prime minister’s defence team jumping for joy - having toiled over the case for almost two years.
They will take pride that their submissions based on painstaking research have resulted in an acquittal for Anwar, despite all the prosecution’s contentions in court.
During the case, Anwar and defence counsel had reiterated that the court process had not been fair. But Anwar, at the same time, is hopeful that “sanity will prevail” and the judge would base his findings on facts and law.
One may recall that Anwar had screamed from the dock that “the court is unfair”. The defence had argued that there were cogent, compelling and incontrovertible evidence to support its argument that Anwar did not commit sodomy.
In mid-December, the defence also described accuser Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan (far left) as a “puppet” in the plot. It was claimed Saiful had inserted a plastic object into his anus to make it seem like he had been sodomised.
Anwar’s counsel Sankara Nair said since the plan to self-injure did not work, the prosecution later produced the KY Gel as a method to explain why Saiful suffered no injuries to his anus.
He submitted that the prosecution’s earlier allegation that Dr Mohamad Osman Abdul Hamid had added the word “plastic” later was “ludicrous and defied logic”.
“Notwithstanding all the so-called ‘evidence’, there is no substantive evidence as presented by the defence that the crime ever took place,” said another lawyer.
Critical factor
The verdict may also be a critical factor in garnering votes for both Pakatan and BN in the forthcoming general election.
Allegations that the verdict will be a predetermined decision will also hold no water if Anwar is found ‘not guilty’.
“Rumours that the entire proceedings were aimed at showing that they were blatantly unfair, will not be true anymore if Anwar wins this case,” said a law lecturer.
It must not be forgotten that Anwar’s imprisonment after the first sodomy trial helped springboard the opposition alliance that later almost caused a tipping point for the opposition in the March 2008 general election.
Opposition leaders believe that his conviction and imprisonment would strengthen Pakatan’s chances of gaining a better foothold in the next general election.
Given all the pros and cons of the Sodomy II trial, everything rests with the verdict.
On March 8, 2011, High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah (left) acted in all fairness by rejecting the DNA taken from items used by Anwar in a police cell, stating that it had been wrongly obtained.
His decision granted Anwar a rare and short-lived victory in the lengthy trial.
On Monday, the verdict - ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ - will rest squarely in the mind of Zabidin, who would weigh the case judiciously with all the pros and cons presented during the trial.
From the Palace of Justice and halls of Putrajaya there will be echoes: “We told you so, the judiciary is independent.”
Can you imagine the editorials following a ‘not guilty’ verdict? A different song will be sung and the commentators will have a field day going on another spin that the government and the judiciary have always been fair.
A ‘not guilty’ verdict may also change the whole political landscape as Anwar may cease to be seen as a martyr. The sympathy factor may vanish.Could it hurt Pakatan Rakyat or BN? Will BN be able to regain lost ground after several recent corruption claims that implicate the government and cabinet? Eventually, it’s how the voters perceive it.
All Malaysians hope that a fair and transparent judiciary will announce a verdict that will make Malaysia proud of its independent judiciary.
If it’s a ‘not guilty’ verdict, it may come with conditions. According to a lawyer, Anwar may receive a conditional discharge not amounting to an acquittal. He may be set free, but the case may be reopened if any further evidence is uncovered by the prosecution.
“The semen,” he quipped, “may be found in another anus somewhere, and there is no telling how long a new case will drag on.”
Meanwhile, the prosecution’s appeal may see the case going for another long-drawn battle.
Will sanity prevails?
Of course, a favourable verdict will see the former deputy prime minister’s defence team jumping for joy - having toiled over the case for almost two years.
They will take pride that their submissions based on painstaking research have resulted in an acquittal for Anwar, despite all the prosecution’s contentions in court.
During the case, Anwar and defence counsel had reiterated that the court process had not been fair. But Anwar, at the same time, is hopeful that “sanity will prevail” and the judge would base his findings on facts and law.
One may recall that Anwar had screamed from the dock that “the court is unfair”. The defence had argued that there were cogent, compelling and incontrovertible evidence to support its argument that Anwar did not commit sodomy.
In mid-December, the defence also described accuser Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan (far left) as a “puppet” in the plot. It was claimed Saiful had inserted a plastic object into his anus to make it seem like he had been sodomised.Anwar’s counsel Sankara Nair said since the plan to self-injure did not work, the prosecution later produced the KY Gel as a method to explain why Saiful suffered no injuries to his anus.
He submitted that the prosecution’s earlier allegation that Dr Mohamad Osman Abdul Hamid had added the word “plastic” later was “ludicrous and defied logic”.
“Notwithstanding all the so-called ‘evidence’, there is no substantive evidence as presented by the defence that the crime ever took place,” said another lawyer.
Critical factor
The verdict may also be a critical factor in garnering votes for both Pakatan and BN in the forthcoming general election.
Allegations that the verdict will be a predetermined decision will also hold no water if Anwar is found ‘not guilty’.
“Rumours that the entire proceedings were aimed at showing that they were blatantly unfair, will not be true anymore if Anwar wins this case,” said a law lecturer.
It must not be forgotten that Anwar’s imprisonment after the first sodomy trial helped springboard the opposition alliance that later almost caused a tipping point for the opposition in the March 2008 general election.
Opposition leaders believe that his conviction and imprisonment would strengthen Pakatan’s chances of gaining a better foothold in the next general election.
Given all the pros and cons of the Sodomy II trial, everything rests with the verdict.On March 8, 2011, High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah (left) acted in all fairness by rejecting the DNA taken from items used by Anwar in a police cell, stating that it had been wrongly obtained.
His decision granted Anwar a rare and short-lived victory in the lengthy trial.
On Monday, the verdict - ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ - will rest squarely in the mind of Zabidin, who would weigh the case judiciously with all the pros and cons presented during the trial.
M KRISHNAMOORTHY is a freelance journalist and local coordinator for CNN, BBC and several other foreign television networks. He was formerly with Star and New Straits Times and has authored four books.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.