Second sodomy police report against Anwar Ibrahim: Banana tree bears fruits twice?
If you think ‘pisang tak akan berbuah dua kali’ (banana tree does not bear fruits twice)…. you are wrong. In Malaysia, a banana tree can ‘bear fruits twice’.
In 1997, Anwar Ibrahim was sacked from the government by Mahathir allegedly for sodomy, found guilty in 2000 and sentenced to a six-year jail term. However, in 2004 the sodomy conviction was overturned and reversed by the Federal Court, the highest court, and Anwar was subsequently released.
We thought that was it. The trial was shameful and any normal person would have thought the BN Government should have learned its lesson. But it looks like there is no way to get Anwar arrested for reasons other than sodomy.
Malaysiakini latest report is, to say the least, unexpected…. not after 10 years and after the Federal Court reversed the conviction.
A police report has been lodged against PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim for allegedly sodomosing one of his aides - the second time that such an accusation had been made in over 10 years.
The report was lodged by the 23-year-old victim at the Jalan Travers police station at 6pm.
KL police chief DCP Muhammad Sabtu Osman has confirmed that the report had been made.
It is learnt that Anwar met with a number of party leaders at an emergency meeting late tonight.
At 11.15pm, PKR sent out an SMS message stating that the police had detained Anwar’s special aide Saiful Bahari this afternoon and forced him to lodge a police report about being sodomised by his boss.
It added that the police are expected to arrest Anwar soon.
Source: Malaysiakini
Poor Anwar…. will he end up in jail yet again? Will he end up black-eyed again? Do you believe this latest allegation?
Photo credit: Malaysiakini
From the blogosphere:
- Anwar accused of sodomy again: “Coincidental” Timing? Or did Anwar have the 50 MP’s he needed? Nathaniel Tan
- Sodomy, Part Two Rocky’s Bru
- Police report against Anwar Ibrahim for alleged sodomy MageP’s Lab
- Orifice Intactness Check, Bodily Fluid Mattress Stains…Oh, Here We Go Again… Sensintrovert
- Sodom me? Kickdefella
- Anwar Ibrahim arrested again for sodomy? Susan Loone
- Anwar reported for sodomy! Again? The Way I See It
Related Stories
POSTED IN: Politic
5 opinions for Second sodomy police report against Anwar Ibrahim: Banana tree bears fruits twice?
dede
Jun 29, 2008 at 12:07 pm
i know it’s politic work…but anwar, a homo? Can’t deny that too…and that’s still a huge SIN in Malaysia, isn’t it?
Aiyzak
Jul 1, 2008 at 3:14 am
Hye guys,
I quoted this from renovatio blogged by stephendoss concrning about Anwar sodomise cases issued previously..checked it out..
“FOR THE BENEFIT OF READERS, I HAVE EXTRACTED FROM THE PAST THE JUDGMENT BY THE FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA, ANWAR’S APPEAL AGAINST HIS CONVICTION ON SODOMY. THE FOLLOWING IS A MAJORITY DECISION REACHED BY THE JUDGES SITTING IN THE FEDERAL COURT ON THE ANWAR IBRAHIM APPEAL AGAINST HIS CONVICTION ON SODOMY.
PLEASE NOTE AND READ CAREFULLY THE VERDICT, THAT ALTHOUGH THE JUDGES HAD NO DOUBT IN THEIR MINDS THAT THE ACT OF SODOMY BY ANWAR IBRAHIM HAD TAKEN PLACE, BUT TO RELY SOLELY ON AZIZAN’S EVIDENCE WOULD BE UNSAFE FOR THE PURPOSES OF UPHOLDING THE JUDGEMENT.
SO DID THE ACT OF SODOMY TAKE PLACE ? YES ACCORDING TO THE JUDGES. BUT DUE TO A TECHNICALITY THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO DISMISS THE CASE.
DALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA
(BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN)
RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: 05-6-2003 (W)
ANTARA
DATO’ SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM … PERAYU
DAN
PENDAKWA RAYA … RESPONDEN
RAYUAN JENAYAH NO. 05-7-2003 (W)
SUKMA DARMAWAN SASMITAAT MADJA … PERAYU
DAN
PENDAKWA RAYA … RESPONDEN
CORAM:
ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD F.C.J.
RAHMAH HUSSAIN F.C.J.
TENGKU BAHARUDIN SHAH TENGKU MAHMUD J.C.A.
MAJORITY JUDGMENT OF
ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD F.C.J.
AND TENGKU BAHARUDIN SHAH TENGKU MAHMUD J.C.A.
In this judgment, Dato’ Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim will be referred to as “the first appellant” and Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja will be referred to as “the second appellant”.
The first appellant was charged with an offence punishable under section 377B of the Penal Code.
The second appellant was charged with two offences. The first charge is for abetting the first appellant in the commission of the offence with which the first appellant was charged. The second charge is similar to the charge against the first appellant i.e. under section 377B of the Penal Code.
Both the appellants were tried jointly. The first appellant was convicted and sentenced to nine years imprisonment commencing from the expiry of the sentence he was then serving in the first trial. High Court Kuala Lumpur Criminal Trial No. 45-48-1998 (1999)2 M.L.J. 1 (H.C), (2002)2 M.L.J. 486 (C.A.) and (2002) 3 M.L.J. 193 (F.C.)). The second appellant was convicted on both charges and sentenced to six years imprisonment and two strokes for each charge with the sentences of imprisonment to run concurrently. For the judgment of the High Court in the present case, see (2001) 3 M.L.J. 193.
They appealed to the Court of Appeal. Their appeals were dismissed – see (2004) 1 M.L.J. 177.
They appealed to this court and this is the majority judgment of this court.
Section 87(3) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (“CJA 1964”) provides that a criminal appeal to this court “may lie on a question of fact or a question of law or on a question of mixed fact and law.” The position is the same as in the case of the Court of Appeal hearing an appeal from a trial in the High Court as in this case – see section 50(3) CJA 1964.
To summarise our judgment, even though reading the appeal record, we find evidence to confirm that the appellants were involved in homosexual activities and we are more inclined to believe that the alleged incident at Tivoli Villa did happen, sometime, this court, as a court of law, may only convict the appellants if the prosecution has successfully proved the alleged offences as stated in the charges, beyond reasonable doubt, on admissible evidence and in accordance with established principles of law. We may be convinced in our minds of the guilt or innocence of the appellants but our decision must only be based on the evidence adduced and nothing else.”
CJCM: I thought the part that says “….we find evidence to confirm that the appellants were involved in homosexual activities….” is only an opinion of only one of the judges? Am I right?
Asking Anwar to swear on Quran: Barking the wrong tree
Jul 8, 2008 at 8:01 pm
[…] sodomy allegation […]
Muslim leaders around the world support Anwar Ibrahim
Jul 15, 2008 at 5:24 pm
[…] second sodomy allegation […]
Anwar Ibrahim arrested… again.
Jul 16, 2008 at 2:07 pm
[…] banana tree can bear fruits twice. […]
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: