Friday, 26-Sep-2003 8:47 AM

Anwar up in arms on the court’s pussyfooting

Anwar Ibrahim is up in arms. It is now more than five months since he applied for bail in April this year and the court has not given any indication when it will deliver its verdict, let alone whether bail will be granted.

In the US, bail applications are mere formalities and take just a couple of minutes. All the defence and prosecution need to do is argue on the quantum of bail, not why bail should or should not be allowed. The judge, after listening to both sides, will make the final decision on how much the bail should be set at. And it is all done orally and bail is immediate.

In Malaysia, the procedure is almost as straight forward though arguments are not confined to just the quantum but also the reason why bail should be denied, in the event the prosecution wishes to object to bail. But objections to bail would be the exception rather than the rule and oral bail applications are not only allowed, but bail would also be granted.

In Anwar’s case, though, it is different. First of all, an oral application was not entertained; it had to be made in writing. Why this is so was not explained. And why only Anwar is subjected to this procedure was also not explained.

Then the court was told it has no jurisdiction to even hear the bail application, let alone grant it. The court was now put on trial and it had to defend itself against the objections of the Attorney General. Finally, against the wishes of the AG, the court ruled it does after all have jurisdiction to hear the bail application.

When the show finally hit the road, Anwar had to offer proof as to why he should be granted bail, though this was not his job to do so. The prosecution, in turn, did not need to offer any proof why he should not be granted bail. All the prosecution needed to do was to object to bail on grounds that Anwar may abscond and may not return to Malaysia to face trial (appeal hearing) or serve his sentence in the event he fails in his appeal. No evidence was required to support this allegation. A simple, unsubstantiated statement sufficed.

Further to that, the prosecution argued that, if Anwar were granted bail, there would be a possibility he would commit a crime. What crime Anwar may commit was not mentioned. It is not that they are worried he may continue to commit the same old crime he is facing trial for. It is that he may commit a crime, any crime.

Now, why have they come to this conclusion? What makes the AG think that Anwar may commit a crime, any crime? What evidence is there to support this argument? No evidence, the AG did not say for a fact that Anwar may commit a crime, he said, nobody knows whether Anwar will or will not commit a crime as only God would know.

So, there you have it. The AG did not say that Anwar would commit a crime for sure. He is just saying this is something only God would know so Anwar should be denied bail since we would not know what only God knows.

And, after hearing all these arguments that stretched for weeks, the court retired and reserved its judgment, promising to come back in super-fast time to deliver its judgement.

That was many, many months ago and Anwar is still waiting. In the meantime, almost ten percent of his sentence is being served.

The judges are clearly pussyfooting. Are they waiting for November when Dr Mahathir Mohamad would by then have retired and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has taken over as Prime Minister? Then, if Anwar were not granted bail, Abdullah would be blamed for this.

Anwar is outraged by the whole matter and has accused the judges of lacking moral courage. In a statement released through his lawyer Sankara N. Nair yesterday, Anwar said he was amazed that the three judges, Justices Pajan Singh Gill, Hashim Mohd Yusof and Richard Malanjum, were still unable to issue a verdict after so many months.

Nair said he and another of Anwar’s lawyers, Karpal Singh, have made numerous enquiries to the Court of Appeal registry over the past few months to no avail.

"We have asked them time and again but they only told us no decision yet," said Nair.

Nair added that this delay was in breach of an earlier directive by the Chief Justice that judgments must be delivered within six weeks after the conclusion of the hearing.

Anwar is entitled to bail like any other prisoner, argued Nair. In fact, the offence that he has been charged with is one where bail has been granted as a matter of course.

It is most frustrating for anyone to be made to wait indefinitely for a decision on a simple bail application, explained Nair. Yet, Syed Hamid Albar, Malaysia’s Foreign Minister, had the gall to boast on BBC's ‘Hardtalk’ two days ago that the Malaysian judiciary is independent and everything is transparent.

Perhaps, said Nair, he can reply to Anwar's statement below.

Anwar Ibrahim’s statement on the status of his bail application

I must express my abhorrence in the manner in which my application for bail is being treated by the Court of Appeal.

This is an issue that is so basic that even a Magistrate can dispense expeditiously as a matter of course.

Normally, bail applications are made orally; on the contrary I was subjected to the arduous task of making a written application.

After hearing clear and cogent arguments put forth by my counsel, I am amazed that, after more than four months, the Court of Appeal has still not come to a decision.  

It is so tragic that Judges of the Superior Court lack the moral courage to honour their oath of office, uphold the rule of law and to stand up for what’s right.

Check your voter registration here