Blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin: Lawyers say he must exhaust local channels first

Meanwhile, former legal and judicial officer Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman said there was nothing the Malaysian government could do to force Raja Petra to return to stand trial in Malaysia unless the existing extradition treaty covering criminal cases is enforced.

KEVIN ONG, Malay Mail

Malaysian lawyers have described the challenge by online portal Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamarudin for his criminal defamation case to be tried in the UK as ludicrous.

In raising the challenge in the first place, questions are also being asked if Raja Petra is simply trying to draw international attention to the supposed bias in the judicial system here (see accompanying report).

Veteran lawyer Wan Asmir Wan Majid believes Raja Petra is trying to gain the International Court’s attention for his case to be tried there on neutral grounds.

If this is the ultimate aim, Wan Asmir felt Raja Petra is going about it the wrong way. “Getting the involvement of the international court is a long-winded process. He should come back to Malaysia to resolve this matter instead.”

“Furthermore, the Malaysian Attorney-General’s chambers cannot deliberately release investigation papers to a foreign court at will.”

Another senior lawyer Salim Bashir said Raja Petra had yet to exhaust his remedies locally, as the case was suspended when the editor disappeared after jumping bail. He failed to attend court hearings on April 23 and May 23 last year and arrest warrants have since been issued against him.

“Being a fugitive is not going to resolve the matter. He needs to face a fair trial here in Malaysia,” said Salim.

“Should he lose the case, he can always go to the Court of Appeal.”

On Raja Petra’s challenge to be tried in UK, Salim said: “To be tried for acts done in Malaysia in a foreign court is peculiar and unlikely to be undertaken. Both the Malaysian and British governments could refer to the Mutual Existence on Criminal Matters Act 2002 to work on a solution to resolve the issue.”

Meanwhile, former legal and judicial officer Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman said there was nothing the Malaysian government could do to force Raja Petra to return to stand trial in Malaysia unless the existing extradition treaty covering criminal cases is enforced.

“Since Raja Petra was charged for a criminal offence, the government can use the treaty to get him expatriated by the British. Without it, the Malaysian government cannot gain cooperation from the British nor demand the fugitive be sent back.”

“It is all about jurisdiction. The British court cannot try Raja Petra for these Malaysian criminal defamation charges, just as we are powerless to do the same against him in a foreign court.”

Malaysian Bar Council vice-president Lim Chee Wee said the merits of having Raja Petra’s trial conducted in Britain are questionable and felt the blogger should only be tried in Malaysia.

“The only option for Malaysia is to have him extradited, which would then raise human rights issues in Britain as to whether he will be given a fair trial here.”

“While our judiciary has made great strides in improving its disposal of commercial disputes, it is unfortunate the courts have yet to regain public confidence in its decisions involving human rights issues.”

Speaking up for Raja Petra, senior lawyer Yusmadi Yusof said the issue should be seen through the online portal editor’s perspective.

“The issue here is justice and Raja Petra cannot see himself being fairly tried under the Malaysian legal system. He feels the law does not function properly in politically motivated cases such as this.”

Yusmadi said should the Malaysian prosecutors have a firm grip of the case, there was no harm in continuing the trial in Britain.

“Let this be a litmus test for the Malaysian justice system, to see if justice can be made borderless.”

Three criminal defamation charges against Raja Petra stem from a statutory declaration he filed in the KL courts on the murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu based on allegations made against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor.

At Press time, the Attorney-General’s office could not be contacted as to whether extradition orders have or will be issued for Raja Petra.

**********************************************

‘Let’s fight it out in the UK’

By HALIZA HASHIM-DOYLE in London

FLANKED by four burly men, fugitive blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, or RPK, stood at the podium in a packed hall at a law school in London last Saturday and challenged the Malaysian authorities to bring standing charges against him to the courts in the United Kingdom.

The controversial Malaysia Today founder and editor said he would fight charges of criminal defamation and sedition as well as the appeal against his Internal Security Act (ISA) detention, given a level playing field.

“I will take on the government and I will fight them in ‘my’ territory. ‘My’ territory is here in the UK,” he said.

It was his first public appearance since his self-imposed exile from Malaysia over a year ago.

A member from the audience compared him with Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is facing a trial in Malaysia but RPK is instead living in exile in the UK.

RPK rejected the view that he should return home to prove his innocence of the charges levelled against him.

“Unlike Anwar, I do not aspire to be a political leader. I’ll probably be a free man longer than Anwar,” he said.

“A first-year law student can tell you that it is not the job of the accused to prove his innocence. It is the job of the prosecution to prove guilt.”

Dave Vasoodevan, a Malaysian lawyer in London who attended RPK’s talk, said: “The alleged offence took place in Malaysia so only the Malaysian courts have the jurisdiction to try him in Malaysia.”

“Malaysia can request through Interpol or Scotland Yard to arrest him (RPK) if he is seen as running away from the law but UK courts have no jurisdiction to hear this matter. It is a Malaysian case. You can’t choose where to have your case heard.”

“Why RPK challenged the Malaysian authorities to bring standing charges against him to the courts in the UK, only he can explain,” added Vasoodevan.

An audience of about 350 people — mostly Malaysians working and studying in the UK — spent almost two hours listening to RPK’s talk, peppered with humour and sarcasm. RPK was accompanied by his wife, Marina.

The bodyguards in their dark glasses were jittery as latecomers entered the already packed lecture theatre, and they stood at the back of the hall.

But the talk and RPK’s The Silent Roar book-signing session went on without any trouble.

While Londoners were basking in the hot sun on Saturday afternoon, The Malay Mail asked the crowd of businessmen, students, accountants and lawyers why they attended RPK’s talk and what they expected to hear.

“I am intrigued. I read Malaysia Today. I don’t think he is extreme in his views. They are what we think except he is capable of bringing them out in the open, “said a businessman, Lee, who had travelled all the way from Bath.

Azman, an architect from Reading, said: “I expected some new stuff from his talk but he actively posts on his  website daily so some were repeated from his writings. But there were interesting comments on the recent Sibu by-election, and voting systems.”

I don’t think he is an opportunist and he is fighting for a just cause.” Jason, a Cambridge University student, said: “RPK speaks most of what our generation thinks. His voice resonates what we are thinking and we admire his courage.”

His friend Lim echoed the support. “RPK is a catalyst. He enables people to think about issues. It is about our rights. Individual rights and the right to speak for a better future for Malaysia.”

RPK’s talk revolved around the fact that he was twice detained without charge or trial under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and he argued that such a law has outlived its usefulness to the point that Malaysians are afraid of getting arrested under the ISA.

RPK termed ISA as “a political tool used by the Barisan Nasional government to silence dissent and keep secrets”.

“In the past, the ISA stopped you from shooting and bombing. Today, it stops you from having thoughts. So you have a nation of robots.”

Vasoodaven added: “It makes sense, legally, to have a review of the ISA laws, as we know it was originally intended for a specific purpose. It  needs to be revised in line with the modern times as otherwise it stifles the progressive mind.”

RPK’s talk was hosted by the Solicitors International Human Rights Group (SIHRG) which addresses human rights issues in the UK and around the world.

Shubhaa Srinivasan, Malaysia subgroup chair for SIHRG, was pleased with the response to RPK’s first-hand account of his experiences campaigning for transparency and accountability in Malaysian politics.