Justice in Malaysia is still illusory
The public has a right to know what happened in the DPP’s dismissal and the defence counsel is right in calling a mistrial. There is no need for the cloak-and-dagger stuff because justice thrives in the light of transparency. The truth never hurt a good cause and the innocent. The public has a right to know the truth.
Written by Steve Oh, CPI
In another place where justice is beyond political interference, a case like Sodomy 1 would never have existed let alone a serial Sodomy 2. That Anwar Ibrahim is seen as a victim of political conspiracy can’t be denied when even certain foreign governments still keep a close eye on the court proceedings and openly express their reservations and concerns.
The latest scandal involving the key witness and protagonist in Sodomy 2 has resulted in the dismissal of the DPP engaged in the case. Romantic liaisons that develop in professional situations are known to happen but in the case of Sodomy 2 where the future of a high-profile defendant like Anwar Ibrahim is at stake, any hint of a professionally and ethically illicit affair has to be taken seriously.
If Raja Petra Kamarudin had not blown the whistle, it is open to conjecture what might have happened. In fact what has already happened should worry the public, and especially the defendant.
As for RPK, perhaps it is time we take him more seriously especially those who are responsible for upholding justice. It seems unfair to turn a patriot into a fugitive especially one who is only trying to help his country become a better place.
The public has a right to know what happened in the DPP’s dismissal and the defence counsel is right in calling a mistrial. There is no need for the cloak-and-dagger stuff because justice thrives in the light of transparency. The truth never hurt a good cause and the innocent. The public has a right to know the truth.
There is high public interest in Sodomy 2. It is not only the defendant on trial but the whole country, in particular the judiciary. There have been some disturbing aspects in the case such as the accuser seeing a police officer and the country’s PM before making a police report. This lends the case to the criticism it may be politically contaminated.
Then there is the troubling refusal of the court to grant the defendant and his legal team access to crucial statements made by the accuser to the police. It seems to be a fundamental breach of Natural Justice 101 for someone accused of a crime not to be able to know what he is being accused of and the alleged relevant circumstances. Even in Islam you need four witnesses in a claim of rape.
‘Justice must not only be done but be seen to be done’ is a well-known maxim. And it is here that the incumbent administration is seen to falter. Its unwillingness to make the judiciary a highly respected and independent public institution by pursuing every avenue to reform it results in the decision of the country’s Chief Justice, Zaki Azmi, not to pursue the VK Lingam video royal commission recommendations.
Introducing ‘past principle’
Zaki’s reasoning that the VK Lingam (left) scandal dealt with the past and he is more concerned about the future does leave many Malaysians in total bewilderment.
Is this the new guiding principle of responding to the findings of royal commissions? Should we close all the police stations because every reported crime is about the past? If everything that happened in the past should be forgotten, life will be so much more expedient, even more than dropping the VK Lingam scandal.
If judge-fixing has been found to be a problem, those who have allegedly contaminated the judiciary must not be allowed to go scot free. Is that not why cruel dictators are still held to account for their barbaric crimes against humanity many, many years after their evil deeds?
It is utter nonsense to introduce a ‘past principle’ to close the VK Lingam video scandal because the judiciary exists to deal with the past. Justice is about judging past deeds good or bad, and making a proper judgment. After all the accountability of past actions is the premise of justice. So whither justice if people merely let bygones be bygones without some justification.
The role of a royal commission is to establish the truth and facilitate the bringing to account of those who are culpable and exonerating the innocent. We fail those in the commission who laboured to give us the truth by not building on their efforts.
The country is often criticized for its disturbing practice of selective prosecution, of dropping cases that should be pursued and pursuing cases that should be dropped. The VK Lingam video scandal is classic proof.
