Kadir Jasin’s strange confession
The late Karpal Singh said that Anwar and the people he was meeting with were “at the opposite unit” to the one where Saiful had testified that the opposition leader propositioned him for sex after he delivered a document.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Kadir Jasin said that Pakatan Rakyat would become even stronger if Anwar Ibrahim is jailed this Tuesday. Hence it is not in the interest of Umno and Barisan Nasional that Anwar is sent to jail and that it would be better if he were freed.
This is indeed a strange confession coming from someone like Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Tun Daim Zainuddin loyalist Kadir Jasin. He is, in fact, admitting that Umno and Barisan Nasional are so weak and are at the point of death that the one and only thing that can save them would be to allow Anwar to go home.
I doubt such a confession would build confidence in the Umno members and Umno’s partners in Barisan Nasional. If what Kadir Jasin says is true, and if Anwar does get sent to jail, then the Umno members plus MCA, MIC, Gerakan and all those others in Barisan Nasional might as well start packing their bags.
If I had said something like that many would ask how much I have been paid to say that and they will accuse me of selling out or of having been bought. Those aligned to Umno such as Kadir Jasin can say things like that and would be hailed as honest, just telling the truth, brave to say the right thing, and whatnot.
If you convert from Hinduism to Islam that means Allah has helped you to see the truth — if the other way around, then you are an apostate who should be killed.
If you whack Umno then you are a noble and sincere person who is just telling the truth. If you whack the opposition then you are a scoundrel and a crook.
DAP can disagree with PAS in the spirit of agree to disagree. But if PAS disagrees with DAP then they must form a new Islamic party to replace PAS and the PAS President must be ousted.
Malaysia is oozing with double standards and hypocrisy. But then that is how it works in Malaysia.
How is the Federal Court going to rule on Tuesday, 10th February 2015? By Kadir Jasin’s own confession, the five Federal Court judges need to rule according to what is good for Umno: and that is to allow Anwar to go home.
Is Kadir Jasin confessing that the Federal Court can be asked to fix cases in favour of Umno? Does this not mean that the Malaysian judiciary is corrupt? Would this not mean that the allegations that there is no justice in Malaysia true?
Yes, this is what Kadir Jasin is saying. And Kadir Jasin is saying that the five Federal Court judges should ignore the law and the evidence and just take into consideration Umno’s future and rule based on what is good for Umno.
That certainly does not paint a good image of the Malaysian judiciary and I, for one, would not want to face trial in a Malaysian court. And I have a few friends who are judges, people I used to go to school with, and I am beginning to wonder if these friends of mine are crooks and scoundrels.
Anyway, maybe Kadir Jasin can read the 31st May 2010 AFP news report below regarding what the late Karpal Singh said and enlighten us on what that means. According to Karpal Singh, Anwar was not in the apartment where the crime was alleged to have been committed and was, in fact, in another apartment in a meeting with a few people.
And, according to Karpal Singh, they were going to summon these witnesses to testify and prove that Anwar was not in the apartment, which was the scene of the crime, but in another apartment at the time the crime was supposed to have been committed.
If that is true and if Anwar did have an alibi and if there are witnesses who can testify to this and if they had been called to testify then there is no way Anwar is going to be sent to jail. Because of this alibi and because of the witnesses who can testify to this alibi Anwar is definitely going home on Tuesday.
Hence it does not matter whether it is good for Umno that Anwar is not sent to jail. They do not need to fix the case and instruct the five judges as to what to do. The fact that Anwar has an alibi and he can prove he was not in the apartment where the crime was supposed to have been committed and there are witnesses who can testify to this, the five judges are smart enough to send Anwar home without Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak having to ask them to do so.
The question would be, though, were these many witnesses called to testify and did they testify that Anwar was with them in a meeting in another apartment the entire time?
And if this was not done after Karpal Singh said this is what they were going to do why was it not done? If they had done it then there would not even have been any reason for this case going to the Federal Court in the first place and there would be no reason for the five judges to make any decision on Tuesday, 10th February 2015.
Yes, can Kadir Jasin tell us, notwithstanding what is good or not good for Umno?
******************************************
(AFP, 31 May 2010) – Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who is on trial for sodomy, has an alibi and will argue he was in a meeting at the time of the alleged incident, his lawyer said Monday.
Anwar’s accuser, 25-year-old Mohamad Saiful Bukhari Azlan who was an aide in his office, has testified that the pair had a tryst at a Kuala Lumpur condominium in June 2008.
But defence counsel Karpal Singh said he will confront Saiful with Anwar’s alibi that he was in fact meeting with several people at another apartment in the building.
After brief cross-examination of Saiful, the lawyer asked the judge for permission for the defence and the prosecution to visit the building.
“We need to go there for the purpose of the alibi,” Karpal told reporters later. “We want to have a re-look at the place,” he said. “It will be relevant for the purpose of the alibi which I have to put to the witness.”
He said that Anwar and the people he was meeting with were “at the opposite unit” to the one where Saiful had testified that the opposition leader propositioned him for sex after he delivered a document.
