New Bar chief defends predecessor over Anwar statement, says nothing seditious

Malaysian Bar president Steven Thiru finds Christopher Leong's statement regarding Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy conviction neither seditious nor misleading. – The Malaysian Insider filepic, March 29, 2015.

The newly-installed Malaysian Bar president Steven Thiru has defended his predecessor Christopher Leong, who is now under police investigation for sedition over a press statement on the Federal Court's decision to uphold Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy conviction last month.

Steven urged all parties to stop misconstruing Leong's statement, which had commented on the prosecution's handling of the sodomy charge.

"Without the benefit of reading the police report, I wish to reiterate that the Bar Council's press statement after the Federal Court's judgment was on the prosecutorial process in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's case," Steven, who took over from Leong on March 14, told The Malaysian Insider.

"I do not see how the statement could be seditious or misleading or confusing."

This comes after Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar tweeted on March 27 that Leong will be hauled up for allegedly making seditious and misleading statements after a police report was lodged against him.

"@PDRMsia sahkan terima lapuran re-statement yg berunsur menghasut dan mengelirukan Rakyat oleh Christopher Leong. Kita akan panggil CL."

(@PDRMsia confirms that it has received a report of statement that is deemed seditious and misleading the people by Christopher Leong. We will summon CL).

A police report was lodged against Leong by a Yuktesvaran a/l Malaipan over the former Bar president's press statement in which he criticised the prosecution and trial of Anwar.

Leong had issued the statement on February 10, a day after the Federal Court's decision on the opposition leader.

In the statement, Leong had said that the perception that Anwar was being persecuted was fuelled by "glaring anomalies", including not charging the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, in the Permatang Pauh MP's sodomy case.

The former Bar chief said the charge against Anwar was based on a provision of the Penal Code that has rarely been used.

"Given this, it is remarkable that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been prosecuted and convicted twice for an alleged offence of sexual acts between adults wherein the charge does not contain elements of coercion.

"It is a strange world that we live in. These glaring anomalies fuel a perception that Anwar has been persecuted, and not prosecuted," Leong had said in the statement.

Last year, the Federal Court had heard Anwar's appeal against the conviction and five-year jail sentence for sodomising Saiful in Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur in June 2008.

Anwar was charged under Section 337B of the Penal Code, which provides a jail term of up to 20 years and caning, upon conviction. It was read together with Section 337A of the Penal Code, which criminalises sodomy and oral sex.

Leong had said it was notable that the PKR de facto leader was not charged under Section 377C of the Penal Code with forced sodomy or sodomy rape, although there may appear to have been some allegations of coercion made in the proceedings.

Section 377C, which provides for sodomy rape offences, states that whoever voluntarily commits sodomy “on another person without the consent, or against the will, of the other person, or by putting the other person in fear of death or hurt to the person or any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than five years and not more than twenty years, and shall also be liable to whipping”.

"This has also given rise to questions or concerns as to why the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, who was alleged to have been a participant in the act of sodomy, was not charged for abetment under sections 377A and 377B, read together with section 109, of the Penal Code," added Leong.

Leong has come under fire for his statement that was seen to be disparaging of the judiciary.

At the recent Bar Council annual general meeting (AGM) a group of lawyers had moved a motion to censure him for his statement and for him to tender a public apology to the judiciary for bringing the court into contempt and misleading the Malaysian Bar.

Those behind the motion to censure Leong call themselves the G100, a group of 100 lawyers who had previously said Leong's remark was a direct attack on the Federal Court without any legal basis and had brought the nation's highest court into disrepute and odium.

The motion was thrown out after an overwhelming majority voted against it at the AGM.

Meanwhile, a press statement by the G100 issued last night said the group of lawyers has no relation to the person who lodged the police report against Leong.

But it added that a police report on the matter was "proper" as the correct forum to decide whether Leong's press statement was contemptuous was best decided by "the public, the police, the Attorney-General and other relevant parties".

"We trust the authorities will carry out the necessary investigation and follow up action," the statements, signed by the G100's official spokesperson Lukman Sheriff Alias, said.

"Nonetheless G100's position remains the same as before in that the Press Release is contemptuous and should immediately be retracted, and that an apology is due the Federal Court in respect thereof," it added, saying that Leong's statement had made the public perceive the Bar as being no longer impartial.

- TMI