|
Friday, 03-Oct-2003 2:54 PM PRESS STATEMENT BY ANWAR IBRAHIM ON THE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGEMENT ON HIS APPEAL AGAINST THE SODOMY CONVICTION After studying the written Judgment of the Court of Appeal 2003 (Y.A. Dato’ P.S. Gill; Datuk Y.A. Richard Malanjum and Y.A. Dato’ Hashim Yusoff), not only is it totally devoid of legal substance, it reeks of deception and fraud and utter contempt for the truth. On the pivotal appeal issue raised by counsel, of the filing of a notice of alibi under Section 402A of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the consequent judgment on it by the Court - was a brazen attempt by the Court to hoodwink the public into believing that I had not filed it. On the contrary, it was duly filed and even the prosecution during the appeal had in no uncertain terms admitted to the effect. This is a matter of incontrovertible public record and can be verified. The reason for doing this is clear - that is to deny me of my legal right to have the proceedings against me vitiated. This in itself, I dare say, is where the Judges has blatantly overstepped judicial bounds - to the outright borders of committing Judicial Deception. The cavalier manner in which the Judges addressed the role of the two prosecutors who were caught red-handed in their attempt to procure fabricated evidence in order to secure my convictions is most deplorable. Any self-respecting Judge would have treated the matter with the utmost concern; particularly in the light of the Federal Court’s decision, which found both the prosecutors (Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and Dato’ Azhar Mohammad) culpable, and the said Judge Augustine Paul had acted as “defence counsel for the prosecutors”. The Court of Appeal deliberately overlooked such flagrant violation on the part of the High Court Judge working hand in glove with the prosecutors to pervert the course of justice. Other glaring issues staring directly into the face of gross injustice are amongst others: the myriad contradictions and inconsistencies on the part of prosecution witnesses; the unfair conduct of the prosecution in wantonly changing dates of commission of offence (at the interval of years) and the Judge allowing the amendment with impunity; the lack of credit worthiness of the “star” prosecution witnesses who has contradicted himself countless number of times; Justice Ariffin Jaka’s refusal to recuse after evidence was adduced of his ownership of shares in Dataprep Berhad where the Prime Minister’s son, Mirzan Mahathir, was the major shareholder; the cruelty of the Judges in ordering and meting out a consecutive and very harsh sentences (the norm in Section 2, Ordinance 22, corrupt practice sentencing, has always never exceeded two years); and also the unprecedented ordering of the commencement of sentence from date of conviction rather than from date of arrest, being the norm. Despite all this, the fact that I was found guilty reinforces my conviction from the very outset, that the trumped up charges were designed to force me out of office and to relegate me to political oblivion. Can there be any question therefore to the widespread perception of the public that these Judges, including Ariffin Jaka, were handpicked, servile and compliant judges who have now been promptly and generously rewarded with promotions - unfairly bypassing independent judges of integrity. It is pathetic and an utter travesty that these Judges have wantonly sold their souls for worldly gains, failing to recognize the fact that they will still have to account for it someday!” ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM Statement released by SANKARA N. NAIR, Counsel S. N. NAIR & PARTNERS 3 October 2003 Check
your voter registration here |
