FAC News - Friday, August 9, 2002 8:46 AM

To bail, or not to bail, that is the question

To bail, or not to bail, that is the question

The courts are but a stage, and we are all but actors playing a role

It is not that I love Anwar less, but I love corruption more

And Anwar is too honest a person, so Anwar must be killed

If only Shakespeare knew, when he wrote his lines hundreds of years ago, that they could be applied to any situation in any time period.

A fortnight ago, there was this brouhaha about a prominent TV newscaster receiving VIP status and blessed with visits from the powers-that-be that resulted in her raising about US100,000 in public donations for an operation that she had done overseas though doctors said it could easily have been done in Malaysia.

The question on everyone’s lips was, why can’t Anwar also be allowed to go overseas since the doctors have certified that he too needs an urgent operation (and that was two year ago) and that it needs to be done in Germany?

Yesterday, another incident that happened revealed the double standards Malaysia practices – and this is: real criminals get treated better than not real criminals, such as political prisoners.

Remember the Chinese businessman who was sentenced to death for murder last week and he was granted bail by the police? Well, yesterday, another person charged for murder was granted bail.

This is the News Straits Times (NST) and Bernama report on the matter - and remember, the NST is owned by the political party-in-power while Bernama is government-owned.

Prominent lawyer Datuk Balwant Singh, who is facing a murder charge, was released by the High Court here today on a RM500,000 bail pending trial.

Despite murder normally being a non-bailable offence, he was released on a personal bond of RM500,000 to enable the defence to complete its submissions for bail on the grounds of the defendant's infirmity.

Judge Datuk S. Augustine Paul said he was exercising his discretion in releasing Balwant on a personal bond because the court could not complete hearing the application today.

"Since police had released him on police bail after his arrest last month, there is no reason to doubt that he will turn up in court tomorrow for the conclusion of the bail application," he said.

The offence of murder, which carries the death sentence, is non-bailable but Balwant's counsel applied for bail, citing Balwant's age and poor health and arguing that the prosecution had failed to show the grounds required under Section 388.

He said under Section 388, the prosecution would have to show that there were reasonable grounds to believe that he was guilty of the offence. A mere charge was not enough.

Zauyah replied that there were more than reasonable grounds to believe Balwant had committed the offence.

Paul then suggested that the prosecution make its opening address to show the "reasonable grounds" that exist, to enable the court to decide on the bail application.

Zauyah then said the prosecution had eyewitnesses who had seen Balwant shoot the victim.

Justice Augustine Paul allowed the bail application after ruling that the prosecution failed to show that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the 81-year-old lawyer committed the offence that he had been charged with.

Under Section 388 of the Criminal Procedure Code, bail should be denied if there appears to be reasonable grounds for believing that the accused had committed an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment.

Justice Paul said he was unable to hold that Balwant would abscond or tamper with witnesses if released on bail, adding that the medical report tendered by the defence showed that the lawyer was in a very poor health.

"I shall therefore grant bail to the accused in the exceptional circumstances of this case," he said.

Yes, this is the same judge who denied Anwar Ibrahim bail on grounds that he “may tamper with the witnesses” though Anwar's "crime" is bailable and they had merely charged Anwar and was yet to prove he was guilty.

Take note of the following statements above:

1. “The prosecution would have to show that there were reasonable grounds to believe that he was guilty of the offence.” (Did they do this in Anwar’s case?)

2. “A mere charge was not enough.” (Isn’t this what Anwar’s lawyers said?)

3. “The offence of murder, which carries the death sentence, is non-bailable.” (Isn’t Anwar’s “crime” bailable?)

4. “He was unable to hold that Balwant would abscond or tamper with witnesses if released on bail.” (Why then did they assume so for in Anwar’s case?”

5. “The defence showed that the lawyer was in a very poor health.” (Is Anwar any healthier?)

6. “There is no reason to doubt that he will turn up in court.” (And was this not so in Anwar’s case too?)