Friday, 7 January 2011

Anwar's sodomy trial: Can Karpal Singh offer himself as prosecution witness?

What an unbelievable idea by YB Zahrain to call Karpal Singh as prosecution witness in Anwar Ibrahim's ongoing sodomy trial:

YB Zahrain once a PKR MP and very close buddy buddy of Anwar Ibrahim wrote in his blog:

Untuk Tindakan Peguam Negara
Kenyataan Media

Assalammualaikum , Selamat sejahtera dan Selamat Tahun Baru 2011.

Perkembangan terbaru berhubungkait kes LIWAT Ketua Umum PKR Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim amat menarik dan pelik.

Pengakuan Pengerusi DAP Karpal Singh bahawa beliau pernah mendesak Kerajaan menyiasat dakwaan kelakuan songsang Anwar Ibrahim pada tahun 1997 adalah suatu perkembangan penting.

Ini kerana Karpal Singh sendiri telah mengaku pernah di-temui mangsa dan individu lain yang membuat dakwaan liwat ke atas Anwar Ibrahim pada ketika itu.

Tidak dapat diterima akal jika Karpal Singh yang pada ketika itu mendesak siasatan dan mengkritik kerajaan di-Parlimen kerana konon-nya lambat bertindak, kini menjadi Peguambela utama Anwar Ibrahim.

Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa pengakuan Karpal Singh tempohari membawa pelbagai implikasi ke-atas perjalanan kes liwat Anwar Ibrahim yang terbaru – Sodomy 2.

read more here and here.

This is Karpal Singh's reply:

Sodomy trial: ‘Why should I be a witness?’
FMT Staff | January 4, 2011

PETALING JAYA: DAP chairman Karpal Singh brushed off a suggestion that he should be called as a witness in the ongoing sodomy trial of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.

Bayan Baru MP Zahrain Mohd Hashim, an independent MP, yesterday urged Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail to call Karpal as a prosecution witness.

Zahrain referred to Karpal’s earlier admission that he had urged the government to investigate Anwar for the first sodomy allegations in 1997 and that Karpal had met with the complainants in that case.

Zahrain said Karpal must be called as he possessed “important information” about Anwar’s alleged acts.

“It is mind-boggling that Zahrain can suggest that the attorney-general call me as a witness in Anwar’s trial involving Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan after Anwar had been cleared by the Federal Court (of the first sodomy),” Karpal said in a statement today.

“I cannot see how I can give any material evidence in Anwar’s ongoing sodomy trial…”

Read more here.

This is YB Wee Choo Keong rebuttal to Karpal Singh's statement:

YB Karpal Singh should offer himself as a witness!
January 6, 2011 by weechookeong

YB Karpal Singh tried to justify why he should not be called as a witness in YB Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy II trial. These are the excerpts of the press report in FMT.

“Karpal admitted that he, as an opposition MP, did urge that Anwar (who was an Umno leader then) be investigated for sodomy after the complainant, Azizan Abu Bakar, had met him.” …

“Anwar was freed by the Federal Court of the charge against him involving Azizan Abu Bakar on Sept 2, 2004, and his conviction and sentence of six years imprisonment and two strokes of the rotan were set aside.”

“Zahrain’s ignorance is clearly exposed,” said Karpal “I would advise Zahrain in future to be sure of his facts before making public statements. He should think before speaking.”

It seemed from the said press report that YB Karpal Singh was relying heavily on the fact that he made the public statement that he has the evidence of YB Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim involved in sodomy at the DAP Ceramah in the Federal Hotel in 1998 because he was the opposition MP. It gives a bad impression that opposition MP was entitled to make false allegations in public. This cannot be the case. MP must standby what he has uttered within or outside Parliament.

I do not believe that at the material time YB Karpal Singh, who was a MP also a practicing lawyer, made the allegations without verifying what have been presented to him by En Azizan bin Abu Bakar that he was sodmised by the then Deputy Prime Minister. YB Karpal Singh must have been fully appraised of the facts before him and very satisfied that what En Azizan bin Abu Bakar told him were true for him to make the affirmative public statement in hte DAP Ceramah in Federal that “I have the evidence in my hand that the Deputy Prime Minister was involved in sodomy.”, HERE and called upon the then Attorney General, the late Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah, who was his classmate in Singapore and a good friend, to investigate.

read the rest of the excellent post here.

Maybe YB Zahrain's idea is believable after all.....I am just wondering, can Karpal Singh refuse to be a prosecution witness in the ongoing sodomy trial if the AG calls him to do so? Hmm, the layman's mind boggles.


Anonymous said...

Very interesting indeed. One minute this side, the next minute the other. Sounds like AC/DC.

It just goes to show that lawyers can determine a verdict according to which camp they belong.

Hypothetically speaking, if Anwar joins UNMO once again, will Karpal produce the evidence he has?

It does appear however that one can do all the wrongs at the BN camp and the moment they jump ship, all's okay. Hmmmm?

Oh well, that's what you'd call One Malaysia.


eddy said...

He,he I like that Bro, AC/DC indeed. Just goes to show that you cannot have a professional career mix with a political career.

You cannot be a practising lawyer and also a Member of Parliament. In the end no matter how good you are the lines get blurred and this is what happened.

What he said as Karpal the fiery Oppo MP in the late nineties has come back to haunt Karpal the lead defense counsel in 2010/2011.

Interesting what will happen when the sodomy trial resumes on 22 January 2011.

Anonymous said...


It is so predictable. When the trial resumes on 22/01/11, another 'outa da world' excuse will be raised. There are at least 2638 more excuses that have not been raised yet, begining with a dispute over the birthday of Dracula or some other nonsense.

And, of course the political lawyer will defend his client to the max.

Say no more till all 2638 excuses are exhausted.


eddy said...

Bro, Out of the 2638 reasons both Karpal and Anwar cannot use the excuse that they have to attend Parliament sessions he he.