Pakatan Rakyat (PR) Social Political Buzz & Bulls

Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy II The Recorded Truth 28 October 2010

Mahkamah Tinggi Jenayah 3
Di hadapan Yang Arif Dato Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah

PP: Semua hadir
PB: KS, SN, Datuk Param Cumaraswam, (Dato CV Prabhakaran, Ram Singh, Marissa, Radzlan tidak hadir)
WB: Zamri Idrus (untuk SP1)
Experts for the defence: Prof. David Wells (Dr. Brian MacDonalds tidak hadir)
AI hadir

[8.58 a.m.]
MY: Kes untuk sambung pemeriksaan balas SP2. Pihak-pihak masih sama.
KS: We have my Lord, with respect we have reservation (as to the ruling yesterday) as to whether your Lordship have really thought what he had in our submission yesterday.

Your Lordship in fact did not understand what we submitted.
YA: Ive made myself clear yesterday you are entitled to the report on 10th July, but not the notes.
KS: That is already clear. That decision was made by your Lordship previously. In fact, your Lordship has directed for that report to be produce. That is not right

at all with respect to the notes.
YA: Can I see both of you in chambers, please.
KS: Yes I think you should.
[9.00 a.m.] Stand down.

[9.02 a.m.] Kedua-dua pihak masuk ke Kamar Hakim.
[9.23 a.m.] Kedua-dua pihak keluar dari Kamar Hakim.
[9.25 a.m.]
SP2 mengangkat sumpah di dlm Bahasa Inggeris.

Q: This is your first case in court, isnt it?
A: Yes

Q: You are unsure of the evidence and all. You cannot remember, make mistakes etc.
A: It happened two years ago.

Q: The best way is to refer to the notes to refresh your memory. Because you cant remember a lot of things.
A: I only remember the work I did. Things I did not do, I cannot remember it.

Q: Your mistake goes beyond not remembering.
A: I tend to forget. I am human being.

Q: Yes. Human beings tend to forget and normal human being would want to refer to the notes. Would you not want to refer?
A: Ive corrected myself that it is a mistake.

Q: That is in point of a mistake. Im talking in point of you cant remember. Why are you so reluctant to refer to the note! s?

MY: What is your question? Are we having a conversation or what?
KS: I dont know what he said. Forget about the DPP.
YA: Apa soalan, KS?
Q: Why is you reluctant to refer to your notes?
A: Not reluctant. I think it is not necessary because I still can recall whatever things I did.

Q: Can you recall everything?
A: [witness had no chance to answer]

Q: Can you recall the history you recorded from SP1?
A: Yes.

Q: In P22, the history is in 2 liner, isnt it?
A: Yes

Q: Can the 2 liner constitute details? Can it be accepted as details? In your view?
A: Yes.

Q: Those are the details in the notes, nothing more. Let me remind you, you are under oath. A lot of things you said which amount to perjury.

MY: Its not for you to say that.
SN: Prosecution always interfere. Why are you interfering? You are always interfering. []

Q: You are under oath.
A: Yes.

Q: Do you bear the consequences of taking oath?
A: Ive explained before. 7 years imprisonment.

Q: 7 years. Long time. Lets get the truth out of you.

KS: YA, we are of the reason to believe this witness is not telling the truth. And we are making this application that we have a hunch that this witness, with regard to the

nature of the evidence given that this witness what he said in court is different from what is stated in the notes. Notes constitutes a formal statement. A formal statement can

be in writing. In this case there are notes.
YA: Enough for now. Stand down for a while.
[9.31 a.m.] Stand down.

[9.35 a.m.] Pihak-pihak masuk ke Kamar Hakim.
[9.54 a.m.] Pihak-pihak keluar dari Kamar Hakim.

[10.02 a.m.]
YA: Panggil saksi. Diingatkan masih bawah sumpah.

Q: You talked about a report yesterday, dated 10th July.
A: Yes.

Q: You said it was dated.
A: As I said it was on the second page.

Q: Are you sure the date is on the second page?
A: The last part [read page 2 of the 10th July report].

Q: What was ! you wait ed for?
A: We are waiting for the full laboratory report.

Q: That was obtained? When was it obtained?
A: 11th of July

Q: The three of you make a report dated 13th July, was the laboratory result available at that time?
A: Yes.

Q: You received it on the 11th?
A: Yes.

Q: From whom did you get it.
A: Its not me who get it directly. Its received by the Forensic Department and I was called to see it.

Q: You have the benefit of three chemist report?
A: One report from the chemist.

Q: Who is this chemist?
A: Dr. Seah

Q: The one you received on 11th July?
A: Yes.

Q: Only one report?
A: Yes.

Q: No other report was referred? One is enough?
A: The report we received on DNA is

Q: Theres only one chemist report adverted to in P22? No other chemist report was referred to?
A: No.

Q: You are under oath. No other chemist report was referred to?
A: No.

Q: The third time, no chemist report was referred to?
A: No.

Q: P22, page 3. There are two chemist report there isnt it?
A: There are 2 components, but only one report. It comes together.

Q: [refer and read chemist report number]. Is that one report?

MY: He had answered it. First he said there is one reports but two components.
KS:

Q: What are written there are 2 reports.
A: 2 components but one report.

Q: So one report, but two components. So only Dr. Seahs report.
A:

Q: Dr. Seah report is what number?
A: The report number one.

Q: Dr. Seahs report, have you had a copy of that? Look at the top of the page, page 1. Please read it.
A: [read the number of the chemist report]

Q: So there are two reports?
A: I said it is two components.

Q: Look at P22. At the bottom of the page 3. Are both the same?
A: Yes.

Q: Both the same?
A: [read chemist report number]

Q: Are they the same as adverted to Dr. Seahs report?
A: Yes.

Q: The same reports are referred to?
A: Yes.

Q: Exactly the same?
A: Yes.

Q: Read the report number in Dr. Seahs report. Is it there in P22?
A: Yes.

Q: Looking at page 3 of P22. [read chemist report number]. They are not the same, isnt it?
A: Which one is not the same? The number is 08-1 and 08-2.

Q: So one and two is the same? No difference between one and two?
A: Two is not included in the other one.

Q: So there is a difference.
A: Typing error.

Q: Mistake? You said its a typing error in P22?
A: We didnt put the number 1 and 2.

Q: In which report theres a typing error?
A: No.2 is missing in P22.

Q: Its a typing error?
A: No. Its a missing of number 2.

Q: So, theres a third report?
A: Not a third report. Just a missing number 2.

Q: So, 1 and 2 is not together?
A: Its missing.

Q: You said just now its a typing error.
A: Slip of tongue. No. 2 is missing from P22.

Q: Therefore its a difference report at page 3. Is one and two the same?
A: Its different.

Q: Theres a different report at page 3. Has a different report been referred to in P22 page 3?
A: Which one?

Q: The second one?
A:

Q: 08-1. More specific. The other one is 08-2. Would it be right? 08-2 is not in P22.
A: The report is the same.

Q: 08-1 and 08-2 is the same?
A: Its different. The reference number is not stated in P22. But it is a full report.

Q: 08-1 is should be 08-2.
A: 08-1 is also a report

Q: 08-1 is wrong, isnt it?
A: It is not wrong, but it is stated at the back of the chemist report.

Q: Chemist report is 08-2, isnt it? And in Dr. Seah report, [read report number at page 1]. 08-1 is not there?
A: 08-1 is on the last page.

Q: Im talking about what is at page 3 of P22. Theres actually 3 reports. Wouldnt it be right? 08-0, 08-1, and 08-2 at ID25 should also be in P22. So, theres 3 reports

in P22.
A: They are not 3 reports.

Q: There are 3 reports?
A: There are no 3 reports.

Q: Look at the top.! 08-0. I s 08-1 anywhere there?
A: Not on the first page.

Q: So what happened to 08-1?
A: Its on the last page of Dr. Seahs report.

Q: Where is it?
A: There. Toxicology analysis report. [read]

YA: Let me look at ID25 include.
KS: We are not supplied with that
MY: Weve photostated 3 set for all parties. We are not making use of it.
KS: How come its there? We are not served with it.
MY: We talking about the specimens.
KS: We are not talking about the specimens but what was not supplied to us under S.51A Criminal Procedure Code.
MY: We are not relying on it. At no time the witness is relying on it.
KS: No question of reliance.
YA: The issue is since it is not supplied under s.51A of Criminal Procedure Code, whether it can be now made available. Now it is ID..
KS: Can they check first.
YA: Lets proceed with other question. Or you want to stand down?
KS: Yes.
YA: Check whether it was served or not. If not served, then the question is whether it is admissible.
[10.26 a.m.] Stand down

[11.07 a.m.] Kedua-dua pihak masuk ke Kamar Hakim.
[11.17 a.m.] Kedua-dua pihak keluar dari Kamar Hakim.

[11.21 a.m.]
KS: Before we adjourn, we were at the documents your Lordship referred to which is technically not admissible because we were not served.
MY: It was not served,
YA: Ill hear the full submission tomorrow.
KS: No doubt. And we will take submission on both issues together, i.e. the ruling yesterday as to the notes and the admissibility of the toxicology report.
YA: We can proceed with some other aspect with the witness.

Q: P22. As far as P22 is concern, its in reference only to 3 chemist report or rather 2?
A: Only one report, but 2 components.

Q: And with regard to Dr. Seahs report, ID 25, its a very crucial report. Do you agree?
A: Yes.

Q: ID25 and P22, there a complete omission of 08-1.
A: 08-1 is there. The one that is not there is 08-2.

Q: I said what is in ID25. You have 08-0. In! P22, th ere is 08-0. In ID25, there is 08-2 but that is missing in P22.
A: Yes.

Q: Likewise 08-1 is missing in ID25.
A: No. 08-1 is there. It is available

KS: We are going back to same thing My Lords. It was not served on us.

Q: Refer to ID25
A: it was one component consisting of 2 reports.

KS: The report with 08-1 is not served. Technically it is not admissible.
KS: []
MY: Chemist report is ID25, but yang belakang itu bukan ID25.
YA: Tomorrow Ill make my decision. [] Jangan rujuk yang belakang. Kita tak tau sama ada itu admissible atau tidak.

Q: You said DSP Jude was present throughout 3 hours.
A: Yes.

Q: Who does the specimen taking at that time?
A: Specimens collected by us is the specimens is the swabs taken from the body and the anal area, also the blood for toxicology.

Q: How many items was handed to him?
A: 12.

Q: How many items were returned after the analysis?
A: We did not receive any return or any specimen.

Q: What about the results?
A: The result was not given to us until the 11th July.

Q: How many specimens were return? You send 12 specimens for analyisis. Surely you were waiting for the analysis of the 12th specimens. were all returned?
A: I dont have any specimens returned, only the report was given on the 11th July.

Q: You have the laboratory report which is the result of the specimens which has been tested. And that result was in relation to how many specimens?
A: All specimens that was passed to DSP Jude.

Q: Is it reflected in P22? All 12?
A: in P22, when we put the summary

Q: On page 3, how many specimens were there?
A: All the specimens.

Q: Where is it reflected in P22?
A: No.3 where we started with the laboratory analysis as the following

Q: Page 3, how many specimens are referred to there?
A: All the specimens. Thats why we put the last one to refer to chemist report. Its all there.

Q: Page 3, are all there? The result of the 12 taken speci! mens sen t to the laboratory for analysis.
A: Yes.

Q: That result is in relation to how many specimens referred to In there?
A: Its not written but we have the report.

Q: Would it be correct you have it so you can make a conclusive report?
A: Yes.

Q: So you have all the material on 13th for you to come to the conclusion on page 4?
A: Yes

Q: So the report of P22 is conclusive, from whatever you requires and have at that time?
A: All the result is conclusive.

Q: You told the court yesterday that SP1 had been examined by another doctor at Pusrawi?
A: Yes.

Q: Are you aware when SP1 was examined by Dr. Osman at Pusrawi it is stated that the patient alleged that his anus is inserted with a plastic?
A: No. Im not aware of it.

Q: Was SP1 questioned by anyone of you?
A: Yes.

Q: But this was never reveal to you ?
A: No, it was not.

KS: That will be all for now.
MY: What do I do now, YA? Do I re-examine now?
KS: SN Nair will continue.
SN: Can I ask for a stand down for 15 minutes?
YA: Im sure you know what to cross. Of course Ill give you 15 minutes, but please do not repeat the cross. You have to be on different aspect. You check what KS has asked

first. We cannot have different counsel asking the same question to the same witness. Whatever KS has ask, you dont touch on it.
[11.38 a.m.] Stand down.

[11.56 a.m.]
Q: You mentioned that you have interview Saiful.
A: I was not the one interviewing. I was there when the other 2 doctors interviewed him.

Q: But you read the note
A: Yes.

Q: Evidence in chief, you mentioned about lubricant
A: Yes. And also during the interview by the 2 doctors.

Q: You heard the interview?
A: Yes. And also from the history mentioned by the 2 doctors. When there is clarification of the history by the 2 doctors, I was there in the room.

Q: P22, and ID 25. Are you familiar with the documents?
A: Yes

Q: Is lubricant a vital piece of information! ?
A: Yes

Q: Why is it important?
A: It plays important role eg. In case of sodomy you use lubricant it definitely will help the process of sodomy without causing injury.

Q: ID25 and P22. You just said it is very important. Can u show me where in this report that you have ask specifically for a test for lubricant?
A: It is not necessary to make a test for lubricant.

Q: How can it be?
A: Lubricant may be use to make the process easier.

Q: You just mentioned that it was so important. Therefore it is important for you to look for.
A: It is not necessary.

Q: Now you said it is not necessary.
A: Its necessary to know whether lubrication is use or not. But it is not necessary to test the presence of lubricant.

Q: How would you know if there was or there was not?
A: My job is to check for the presence of any semen or fluid.

Q: I just ask how would you know. My question is very specific.
A: I was made aware and it was rectified by the other 2 doctors.

Q: You are not answering my question. If you have interpreted certain results, you did not or a party to the analysis. Is that correct. you didnt analyse the sample, did

you?
A: I didnt analyse it.

Q: So, how would you know? That it was there or not? Would you know or not the lubricant was used? You have to do a test. But the test was not done by you, but the chemist.

Thats why I need to ask. Did you ask for the test of lubricant? Did you take a swab?
A: We didnt ask for the test of the lubricant.

Q: You did not? Thats all I want to ask.
A: No.

Q: Lets go into the swab. But Im sorry My Lord, Ive to ask for this question first. I want to ask about the habit of his bowel behaviour.
A: The only question about his bowel was whether he passed motion. That was what was inquire by the two doctors.

Q: But how about many hours before?
A: He mentioned he did not passed motion for 2 days before he came to us.

Q: Did you ask his natural, regular bowel habits?!
A: I dont really ask on that because to me the relevance of it is not important at that time.

Q: Not important at that time? Isnt that important to ask a man of his natural bowel behaviour?
A: If you think something related to his bowel habits,

Q: But that is important isnt it? And normally asked by doctors.
A: The history is not something that you have to ask at the beginning and stop. If the examination is peculiar and related bowel movements, then we ask.

Q: Its a very common medical practice to get full medical history. Can we agree on that?
A: Yes.

Q: Can we agree on that that the full medical history is incumbent?
A: Depends on what are the complaints.

Q: You said it is a sodomy case.
A: But the important at that time is to rectify if there is a process of sodomy or not. And if there is any finding that is relevant for .e.g. there is any injury, we need

to rectify whether there are other things that may cause injury.

Q: Isnt it not good practice and isnt it incumbent in medical case that you get the full medical history?
A: Not necessary at the beginning. The history can come at any time during the process.

Q: You said you dont have to ask?
A: The history continues. If we need we can clarify at any time.

Q: If a patient goes to the toilet 3 days at a time, or 3 times a day, is it not relevant in a sodomy case?
A: It depends on the case.

Q: I put it to you it is relevant. If someone goes to the toilet 3 times a day, there will be nothing.
A: Depends on the examination.

YA: He disagrees. You put it masa submission whether betul or tak betul.
SN: The witness is not answering my question. It is a simple question of medical examination.
YA: Dia tidak setuju.
SN: He said something else.
MY: He said depends on the situation. You are making a general statement.

Q: Rectal flora. Can you explain what it is? How many types and the quantity.

YA: In this particular case or generally?
SN: Genera! lly

< p>A: Organism available in normal person where it considers where organ, the house that they live .

Q: Im asking what types and what numbers do you find of a rectal flora in human bodies. Not the function of it.
A: There are various types. The one I can remember is echolie, repsolie, enrobics, protious and many more which I cant remember all. The quantity can be millions, cannot

be easily quantified.

Q: And any material that gets in can be taken out immediately, e.g. bacteria.
A: It may works immediately, but Im not sure. It may take effect immediately what goes in, but how fast it can be acted upon Im not sure.

Q: What you heard about what he told Dr. Osman he discuss about pain. Did he ever discuss about pain in the anus?
A: Its a further clarification that was asked to the victim. The reason why he went to Pusrawi, he complaints was pain in the anus.

Q: That was mentioned to you by SP1?
A: When I went through the notes, thats what I get.

Q: And you never ask him. Of course, you examined him. Did you ask him as well?
A: No. I did not go further on his history.

Q: Did he say the pain was still there?
A: I didnt ask.

Q: But he never told? He never told you. Did he told anyone of you that he is still in pain?
A: I cannot remember.

Q: IDD16-Pusrawi Report shown. Refer to the first page. Can you read it.
A: [read medical history]

Q: You mentioned that he went to Pusrawi
A: Its stated pain initially but cancelled of.

Q: I dont think it was cancelled of.
A: Oh, the third line.

Q: Let me read it to you.Pain when passing motion
A: [doctor reiterated]

Q: You mentioned earlier that he went to Pusrawi and did an examination there.
A: Yes.

Q: If you are aware that there was pain, would you or would you not ask him again before you proceed?
A: Before I start, I will definitely ask the patient whether I can proceed or not.

Q: If the patient complaints about the pain, would you ask him. If ! there is pain, would you then proceed?
A: If before I start my examination, Ill explain to the patient Ill insert something into the bottom part, and if theres pain I will definitely not proceed.

Q: Are you suggesting that he was not in pain?
A: Yes. I ask whether I can proceed.

Q: Is it not a good practice to ask the question in the first place?
A: Definitely we have to ask.

Q: Did you ask him?
A: Not directly whether he has pain or not. It is the way I explained to him the procedure about discomfort and pain and the patient said its okay.

Q: Did you ask him directly?
A: Because during the process or before the procedure we need to ask.

Q: Before you did the procedure, you need to ask, dont you?
A: I cant remember. Whether or not I ask him directly I cant remember. But I did explain. I cant remember specifically whether I ask or not.

Q: Do you agree it is a proper practice to ask?
A: Yes.

Q: And you explained to him?
A: Yes.

Q: What did you do next? Step by step.
A: I explained the procedure that I want to do, I started of with the .

Q: I want more specific. His position.
A: I position him in the left lateral on the examination bed and ask the patient has to face against me, facing the wall so that I would be on the back. The right side

of the hand and the body will be on the upper part.

Q: [witnessed referred to an article with a diagram] would it be in that position? Is that a lateral position?
A: Yes. This is a lateral position. The knee needs to go further on the chest. Thats the position I can do the examination easily. It gives good exposure and that is the

position the patient will be comfortable during the procedure.

Q: Is there any guidelines you have as a medical officer as to the positioning?
A: There is no guidelines as to the position during the proctoscopy examination. The standard practice usually people will put in a lateral position.

Q: And where did you get this standard prac! tice fro m?
A: In the process of studying from student to medical doctor. Its a common practice in hospitals.

Q: Is there any international guidelines?
A: Im not really aware of it.

Q: Agree that if you do according to your own standard there is a high risk of contamination?
A: I disagree.

Q: This is according to your style and not on the international guidelines.
A: It is something that we practice so many many years.

Q: And there is no guidelines at all?
A: Im not aware of it. There is no specific positioning when you do proctoscopy examination.

Q: You did this on daily basis, dont you? And you cant refer to me any guidelines?

MY: What are you asking?
YA: He already answered that he is not aware.
MY: He already answered.
SN: There must be a guideline somewhere. But he doesnt know.
MY: There could be.
YA: Kalau you kata ada guideline, then you tunjuk.

Q: Now swabs. How do you go about taking the swabs?
A: As I explained just now, after putting him in the position of left lateral position, and the knee upper to the chest to give us good exposure to do the work.

Subsequently, I use the equipment called proctoscope. In this case, plastic proctoscope. Before I put the proctoscope in, I use saline. To my experience if I put the proctoscope

without saline or any lubrication it can cause discomfort or any other injury at the anal. And I cant push it in of the splinter. Im worried Im the one who would cause the

injury. So I decided to use a Lignocaine gel as a lubricant for my insertion of the proctoscope to the victim. I successfully put the proctoscope in him and I visualize the

rectum and with me also there was a sterile swab. It was passed to me and I use that swab to take the sample to the highest place which it can reach in the rectum as the first

specimen. And then I swab in circular the highest part and take out the swab and put in the container which is already made available by Dr. Siew. I take 2 samples f! rom the< /p>

upper part that the most reachable part of the rectum and passed it back to Dr. Siew and he labelled it. And the same goes to the third specimen when I bring the proctoscope out

from the patients rectum.

Q: How about peri anal swab?
A: Peri anal swab was taken before I proceed with the proctoscopy examination.

Q: Refer P22, page 3, item 1-12. Is this swabs taken in this sequence?
A: Yes.

Q: Who did the swabbing first?
A: Dr. Khairul.

Q: And you when? Second?
A: Yes.

Q: This is exactly the sequence?
A: Yes.

Q: Did you then photographed the swabs?
A: I cant remember. Photographs were taken but the swabs I cant remember.

Q: What do you mean?
A: Photographs were taken when I did the examination. The swabs I was not aware. As far as I remember, I passed the swabs to Dr. Siew immediately.

Q: What was the states of the swabs? Were they clean swabs?
A: Definitely. I follow the sterility method thats supposed to be followed. And it is supposed to be a clean process of taking the swabs.

Q: What was the condition of the swabs after taking?
A: I saw some staining on the swabs in the process of taking out the swabs. I can visualized it.

Q: Are you referring to mucosa?
A: It should not be. Mucosa is the wall of the rectum. We swab material on the mucosa.

Q: Youve got to swab the wall.
A: Mucosa is the wall. We swab the wall. But what comes out is not mucosa, but the material on the mucosa.

Q: Is photographing swabs a standard procedure? Is it a good thing to do?
A: The swabs are taken for analysis, it is meant for analysis and it will be sent to the laboratory and ought to be ratify.

Q: Are you trained forensic?
A: No.

Q: You said that photographs were taken. What photographs were taken?
A: It is for the findings during examination. Findings on body like scars. The one I remember was at the body. When you have a positive finding, you photographs it.

Q: Positive findings only? ! Or gener ally youll take the photographs? Other you did not? There would be other scars, e.g. appendicitis.
A: If there is positive findings.

Q: Did you take any photographs?
A: I did not.

Q: Did you know any photographs were taken?
A: Yes.

Q: Were you aware there were earlier proctoscopic examination before you proceed?
A: Yes. On the further clarification on the Pusrawi story. According to the victim, he said he was examined, but whether using proctoscope or not, he did not know.

Q: You did not ask him?
A: I did not ask him directly, but he said some instrument were used.

Q: So, there was some instrument used. Was it instument used to enter his anus?
A: We do not know the details.

Q: What else if not proctoscope?
A: Im not aware of that.

MY: He doesnt know that this thing is called proctoscope. If he said it is instrument, it is instrument.
YA: Ask him whether the instrument is proctoscope.

Q: Did he say anything was inserted?
A: He did not say inserted but used.

Q: Did you ask him?
A: I did not ask further.

Q: Is it not logical to ask? If there is something used, surely there should be lubricant introduced inside?
A: Yes.

Q: When you use the proctoscope, that would be a second one, is it? There will be contamination.
A: Without using the proctoscope there will be no way I will know there is penetration towards the anus.

Q: You couldve asked this question.
A: I did not ask on that part. I was not involved in the history taking.

Q: But he was there.
A: I was made aware something was done to him but to what extent I did not ask.

Q: Why did you not ask?
A: Because at that time I just want to do the examination on the patient. I dont clarify further. I know in my mind something might have been done onto the patient.

Q: Surely here if something was done, were you aware when you swab there would be contamination or cross-contamination?
A: Yes.

Q: Surely here if something w! as done, dont you think it is a good practice to ask first to prevent contamination or cross-contamination?
A: Its a good practice to ask.

Q: You said pictures were taken. Where in P22 stated that pictures were taken?
A: Of course it was already written on the report so it was not necessary.

Q: Can you produce the photographs?
A: Its not with me. Its with the Forensic Department.

Q: Is it available?
A: I need to check it first.

Q: Can it be made available?
A: Yes.

SN: I would like to look at the photograph.
YA: Are you entitled to it? I made a ruling which went up to the Federal Court.
SN: This is in the course of proceeding. What was in the Federal Court is the pre-trial stage. So it may not apply.
MY: As of now, what has been establish is the photographs of the scars. If you want other photographs, what is the relevancy?
SN: Relevant for my expert.
MY: Youve not establish which part.

Q: Which photographs of the part taken?
A: Example, pigmentation of the scars.

Q: Were there photographs as to the genital area and the anus?
A: No. Just for the scars.

Q: About the high rectal swabs. How high were the swabs taken?
A: The equipment, i.e. the proctoscopes length is about 6.5 cm. If you can enter completely it in, you can reach the rectal part. Specimens can be taken, after you take

out the introducer, you can go as high as 2.5 cm.

Q: How long is a male adult rectum?
A: The rectum is about 12-15 cm.

Q: And the anal canal?
A: 3-4 cm.

Q: In this particular case?
A: If I put the proctoscope of 6.5 cm, I already reached the lower part of the rectum. And I have the swab with a length of 15 cm, and if I take a length of a 15cm swab, I

can go 2.5 cm further.

Q: [witness is shown with a proctoscope from the defence] Are they of a standard size?
A: We have the smallest one for kids.

Q: This one, is it the same size you use?
A: Mine was 6.5 cm.

YA: Anybody has a ruler?
[witn! ess is g iven a ruler and measured.]

A: Yours is longer.

YA: Berapa panjang?
A: This one is about 8 cm. I used 6.5 cm.

Q: You said you went 2.5 cm further up.
A: Yes. From the end of the proctoscope.

Q: What was the condition of the anal? The rectum?
A: The rectum was empty.

Q: Did you record that down?
A: I did not.

Q: Would it not be important to record it down?
A: Not for this case.

Q: Why?
A: Because if it is full, it will be significant because faeces will come down. But no faeces came down from the rectum. So I have opportunity to take without the

disturbance of the faeces.

Q: So you got a swab from an empty rectum?
A: Yes.

Q: We go back on the pain. If someone complaints of severe pain and come to you for examination, would you be able to touch him at the anus?
A: I will need to elicit where the pain is and I need to localize the pain.

Q: They cant even sit down, is it correct? How are you going to examined him?
A: External examination only. We will find the pain and gives us the idea of

Q: What about the peri anal region? Something you cannot see?
A: Normally we will not put the proctoscope in without a proper anaesthesia.

Q: So, if you have anal pain, you can still do anal examination after giving anaesthesia?
A: Yes.

Q: In this case, there is an element of pain. Yet you put the proctoscope in easily.
A: Like I explained just now, I ask the patient and explained the procedure. I explained to him that he might experience discomfort and pain. But he said okay. And I

continue with the examination.

Q: Did you use saline?
A: I use saline to lubricate the proctoscope before I insert it during my first attempt.

Q: If you use saline, will there be any effect of anymic?
A: The amount is small.

Q: You think small amount will not case anymic?
A: Yes.

Q: Are you sure?
A: It is a normal mechanism to prevent us from causing injury. If there is resistance, I! will no t put it in because I might cause injury.

Q: How many attempt?
A: Only once.

Q: SP1 mentioned of a non-consensual act. Did he mentioned it to you?
A: Yes.

Q: If that is so, usually the anal area will be constricted and therefore it will be difficult to enter?
A: Yes, difficult normally.

Q: Even if you were to do it using gel, it will still be very difficult to do it.
A: Initially we have problems to enter, but in human being there is a physiology process called physiological reflects at the anal canal where the constricting anal will

relax.

Q: But thats a very long process. We are talking about an instance, a very instance constrict reaction. It will not only cause some level of trauma, but also tear and

seizure.
A: It may.

Q: Normally if person have pain in the anus, what will be the cause?
A: Can be caused by Lots of factors. One, must consider whether he has infection. Thats a common thing. There can be infection at the peri anal and also the inside. The

second one is where you have like disease at the anal rectum where you can have active faeces which can cause a lot of pain. third one is if you have any injury inside, problem

with your motion, you have like a fissure that can cause pain also.

Q: Tenesmus?
A: Yes.

Q: What is a tenesmus?
A: It is a feeling or the sensation that you have when you want to defecate. The feeling that you cannot completely defecate.

Q: How long would this pain subside?
A: Depends on the disease.

Q: What about tenesmus? How long will it take?
A: It is very individual. I cant really say.

Q: 3 days?
A: For example if the injury is very small, it is faster. Less than 24 hours.

Q: Is the rectum sensitive to pain? Generally.
A: No.

Q: Which part of the anal rectum region can cause pain?
A: [recording not clear]

Q: Do you agree that the rectum is where a lot of absorption takes place?
A: Its not only rectum but it is the entire larg! e area o f the colon.

Q: Large bowel?
A: Yes. Not so much of the anal area but the upper rectum.

Q: Because of the absorption of the water, it can cause constipation. It may become dry?
A: The absorption can depend on the body. If you need to conserve fluid your body can retain water. So if your body doesnt really need much of absorption, it will not

absorb so much.

Q: What about constant absorption in terms of organic fluid at the anal?
A: If anything physiology is coming up downwards it absorb. But if it is coming down upwards Im not sure. It is a process that is already happened in the intestine that

has already started before it enters the rectum.

Q: Are you suggesting that the rectum is discriminating here?
A: No. It is a continuous process. It is fully there and the absorption can happen there only.

Q: In some patient, you have to administer certain medication to the rectal area. What are the general pain relief?
A: Paracetamol, voltaren.

Q: What about voltaren? That is one of it? What is the purpose of using that analgesic?
A: It gives you a faster action.

Q: What happened in there is absorption, isnt it?
A: Yes.

Q: It doesnt matter isnt it? As long as it is organic, it will absorb?
A: Like I said, I cant commit that everything can be absorb.

Q: But, it is organic fluid, not medication. Its not oil. So can be absorb?
A: It can be absorbed.

Q: Did you do that examination on SP1. Is it not a good practice to do?
A: No.

Q: Why not?
A: Putting my finger in the anus may cause contamination. And second is injury.

Q: Are you using a sterile glove? And you need to know the anus laxity.
A: I can assess the laxity of the anus by putting the proctoscope. We will know whether it is a good tone of the anus laxity.

Q: Is it the best method? It is what Ive been told.
A: One of the way, but not the best. If you want to assess, the best is using manufacture That is the best instrument.

Q: ! This is not the best.
A: Yes.

Q: Assuming that SP1 was in a lot of pain would you be able to examine him with proctoscope?
A: I dont think I can assess if he was in a lot of pain. The pasm and the splinter may prevent it from entering.

Q: So sensitive that you cant even touch it?
A: The patient wont allow you to []

SN: Thats all my question for today. Subject to recall.
YA: You have finish?
SN: Subject to the notes.
YA: Can we start with the re-examination this afternoon?
SN: YB Karpal and accused has some matter in the Parliament. No. YB Karpal has some other matters.
YA: If you want to stop early, we can stop now until 2.00 p.m. Stand down.
[1.20 p.m.] Stand down.

Kedua-dua pihak masuk ke Kamar Hakim dan prosiding ditangguhkan ke hari esok.



See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

Anwar or The court is on trial?

  • Past week has been hectic but in between I managed to glance quickly over several online news portal was shocked to read that there was a first medical reports and for the umpteen times the court had denied Anwars defense team access to it. I am not a lawyer but I always thought the court is a venue where disputing party can use it to resolve issues under a set of common rules that applies to both the defense and prosecution. As the trial progresses, it is becoming clearer that one party is subjected to certain rules while the same is not accorded to the other. It does not look much different than the popular comic TV miniseries in the 80s called Night Court.

  • I laughed when it was reported that the prosecuting team leader Solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden had admitted in court he did not know about the so called PUSRAWI medical report. As my post in July 2008, there is no medical report back then but rather a set of medical notes. Technically maybe SG Yusof is right about being unaware of any medical report but he cannot deny the presence of the medical notes and the nightmare and the press conferences that was held by Dr Osman. The notes were published by RPK in Malaysia Today.

  • On its own, based on Dr Osman medical notes by Dr Osman, one cannot conclude that Saiful was or was not sodomize. There isnt any strong evidence back then. Today, I was shocked to read Malaysiakini report which had quoted that Dr Rozali Ibrahim saying that Saiful rectum was empty. This was confirmed by a proctoscopy examination. This is extremely very unusual for a man who did not defecate for two days. The funny thing is Saiful statement to Dr Osman at PUSRAWI says that he has pain in the anus when he passed motion past one week. Combining the Dr Osman medical notes and Dr Rozali statement, it is clear to me that there is a major discrepancy. Quite clearly someone is lying here and has made an ass of himself.

  • W! hile I d isagree on a few things that Anwar does, I think the path that there is being pursued by the Government is totally unfair and unreasonable. No man irrespective of position and religion deserves such a treatment. While this case is on-going, the impact of this case is very negative on BN especially in the city area. In the rural areas, I guess it does makes people began to have doubt that Anwar was actually guilty and that is good enough for BN to sway the votes. Maybe the objective of this whole thing is not to send Anwar to jail but to use the court case process and result for political mileage.

  • Personally I think this court case is having an impact on BN. Najib hard work is being compromised. I wonder what kind of people is advising Najib. This case is costing BN/Najib big time.


  • See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

    Arrested and beaten for testifying against cops?

    I try not to hate cops, I really do.

    I remember the ones who made an effort to get me better food than what lock-up inmates usually get. I think of those who risk life and limb to protect us every single day on the job.

    Very little is to be gained, after all, from hating anyone. Or from trying to lump every member of a group as one monolithic being.

    While we avoid hating people, I’m not sure it’s wrong to hate acts.

    Some say hate is only one side of a coin away from love; that those who hate at least still care, and that the true attitude to worry about is indifference.

    Gunasegaran and Teoh Beng Hock — Two deaths, one day

    On July 16, 2009, Teoh Beng Hock died. This is an incident I hope we will never, ever forget.

    Across town in a Sentul police station on that very same day, another man died as well. His name was R. Gunasegaran, and I believe he was beaten to death.

    Today, 15 months later, I fear that the chain of events that started on that July 16 may endanger the well-being or even lives of another three men.

    Gunasegaran was arrested in a narcotics sweep in Sentul. Two hours later, he was dead.

    His sister R. Ganga Gowri, who I met for the first time this Tuesday, was understandably shocked and traumatised. She did not believe that Gunasegaran died from a “drug overdose” as reported.

    She did not let her malcontent sit idle however; this lady bravely made an effort to locate other individuals who were picked up in the raid along with Gunasegaran, to find the truth about what happened on that July 16.

    As you can imagine, it’s not easy to find people who are willing to talk about witnessing any criminal acts by the police (we will soon see why). It took Ganga Gowri a month of tracking down individuals and slowly getting them to talk.

    One can only imagine how much work it must have taken to persuade three men, already in trouble with the law, to speak out against the police in open court. This, though, is exactly what Ganga Gowri did.

    As a result of her persistence, and in what may have been a first for an inquest into a death in custody, three men finally plucked up the courage to step forward and, in a court of law, openly testified that a policeman beat a suspect.

    Witnesses: Gunasegaran kicked unconscious

    According to documents provided by M. Visvanathan, the lawyer who represented Gunasegaran’s family, the three men who testified are Ravi Subramaniam, Suresh M Subbaiah and K Selvachandran.

    All three men testified that Gunasegaran was beaten and kicked while detained.

    Ravi was made by the police to help Gunasegaran take his fingerprints and urine sample, because the latter was in too bad shape to do so himself.

    Ravi then helped Gunasegaran to a room with a chair, and was sent back to the lock-up. He then heard a chair fall. When he next saw Gunasegaran, he could not ascertain whether he was alive or dead.

    Ravi also testified that a policeman promised him an early release if he would testify that Gunasegaran fell down of his own accord and was not beaten by the police.

    All witnesses corroborated this account, and identified one Lance Corporal Mohd Faizal Mat Taib as the policeman who kicked Gunasegaran in the chest and back. There were also accusations of beatings with a rubber hose and wooden stick.

    Cops walk free

    On Monday, October 25, 2010, coroner Siti Shakirah Mohtarudin gave an open verdict as to the death of Gunasegaran — stating that there was insufficient evidence to prove any cause of death; saying basically that the state had no idea how he died.

    This judgment was delivered despite the eyewitness testimonies. According to a lawyer, at one point in the judgment, the coroner speculated that “the injuries could have been caused by efforts to resuscitate the deceased, even though the medical officer testified that no effort was made at resuscitation.”

    Unsettled and in tears a press conference on Tuesday (I really hope you’ll take the time to watch the short video), Ganga Gowri said: “Why has there been no action taken, despite there being witnesses who saw the beatings? I have been crying since yesterday, I still cannot understand. I cannot accept what is going on.”

    The last time I saw someone look so lost, numb and distraught was when I attended a similar press conference with A. Kugan’s mother.

    One cannot help but marvel at the irony of Manmohan Singh’s visit. Let’s hope he’s aware.

    Selvachandran beaten in front of wife and kids

    Ganga Gowri was joined at this press conference by one S. Saraswathy (I have a cousin by that name), wife of Selvachandran.

    Selvachandran was one of the men who placed the truth above a fear of the authorities, and decided to do his duty to the late Gunasegaran and his family by testifying in court about what he saw happen to Gunasegaran.

    On Monday night, the very same day that the “open verdict” was delivered, Selvachandran would pay the price for his decision to stand up for what was right.

    Saraswathy explained that at around 10pm, a group of unidentified men came banging at their door. While Selvachandran was looking for the keys, they became increasingly aggressive and broke the door down.

    These men handcuffed Selvachandran, made his wife remove his sarung and replace it with a pair of pants, and then bizarrely asked her to give him a kiss (goodbye?).

    They then took him outside and beat him severely in front of his wife and children.

    When his poor, confused children tried to ask these men why they were taking their father, the men hurled verbal abuse at both mother and children, and continued beating Selvachandran.

    They only then briefly flashed some cards showing that they were police and took off with Selvachandran in tow.

    Nobody knows for sure where he is or what he is charged with — early indications suggest that one of the many laws allowing for indefinite detention without trial will or have been used.

    Cops/Gangsters

    The very first episode of the critically acclaimed HBO series “The Wire” features a character called William Gant. In the opening scenes of the episode, we see him nervously giving testimony in court during the murder trial positively identifying the accused — a cousin of a drug lord.

    In the courtroom are men dressed in sharp suits, looking quietly intimidating. It turns out these men have bribed another witness in the same case to reverse her testimony, and the murderer walks free.

    By the end of the episode, William Gant has earned himself a bullet in the head, courtesy of the drug dealers.

    “The Wire” features a world where the cops can do very little to stop criminals from doing whatever they please. In Malaysia, it seems there is very little anybody can do to stop the cops from behaving like criminals whenever they please.

    Neverending impunity

    What kind of police force is so sure of their impunity that they would assault someone who just testified against them the very same night a verdict is delivered exonerating them?

    Their fear of justice is so non-existent that it appears never to have crossed their minds that their actions on Monday night might appear fishy. Or even if it did, there was clearly a belief that there wasn’t a damn thing anyone could do about it. With no verdict ever having found a policeman guilty of abuse or death in custody, can you blame them for thinking so?

    In fact, by law, the only thing you can do in the circumstances that face both Ganga Gowri and Saraswathy — where you feel you have been wronged by the police — is to file a police report.

    Is their only recourse to justice based on some hope that other cops will turn on their colleagues, brothers and sisters? The same men and women they look to watch their back in the field?

    I am entirely hard pressed to see how anyone of any intelligence could possibly fail to see the inherent, mind-blowing stupidity in this blatant conflict of interest.

    Lighting the darkness

    There are good cops, and there are bad cops. In Malaysia, there are some very bad cops indeed.

    I feel the culture of beating and torturing people in police lock-ups is widespread and deeply ingrained. I shudder to think of the degree to which these men and women have become desensitised to violence.

    Most readers of this article would never experience this, and some of us (who I don’t blame) might subconsciously hope that ignoring a problem like this is the same as making it not exist. Or, worse yet, think that it is somehow a necessity in “fighting crime.”

    Some, however, have actually had some seriously bad experiences. Among the middle class, a “popular” case is the nightclub drug raid (read: extortion). This one very unfortunate young man is but the latest in a string of victims in similarly traumatic cases, the type of which we have all heard about for years. Are we ever really the same after?

    While the scale differs, the underlying reasons are the same — a culture of impunity breeds bullies.

    The willingness and ability to inflict harm on other human beings thrives in the dark. It thrives in places where eyes refuse to look, and light refuses to shine.

    The other two witnesses in Gunasegaran’s case have long been in police custody. No one seems to know how they are or what they might be going through — they live in that dark world, one that so few of us can peer into. Thinking about this fills me with dread.

    This far, no further

    I am not exaggerating or trying to play dramatic hero when I say that we (kita, not kami) could be all that separates Selvachandran, Ravi and Suresh from Gunasegaran’s fate.

    I have seen first hand how public pressure stays the hand of excess on the part of the cops — how it saved me from meeting the fate of Mr Tung Ket Ming.

    I know there’s a lot competing for our attention right now — by-elections, mega towers, natural disasters, and even the death of Paul the octopus. It is our heavy-hearted plea that you’ll still manage to spare just a bit of your time to write about this, tell your friends and family about what is happening and join our gathering in two days.

    On Saturday morning, October 30 at 10am, some concerned citizens will be gathering at the Bukit Aman police headquarters at the Lake Gardens entrance to stand with Mrs Saraswathy, Mrs Ganga Gowry, and many others.

    We stand with them not to incite blind hatred against the men and women tasked to protect us, but simply because we can no longer stand idly by as our brothers and sisters are beaten and dying.

    I know it’s a lot to ask of your Saturday morning, but I really do hope you’ll come and show them they are not alone. Come early, enjoy a fresh morning walk, and help make sure a few less fortunate Malaysians may one day be able to enjoy that same walk, free from any violation of their most basic human rights.

    Saraswathy and her children were forced to see something no human should ever have to see. If we do not take enough effort to show we care and that we will not suffer such evil in our midst, they — or others like them who we have not met yet — may have to feel what Ganga Gowry, Teoh Beng Hock’s family, Aminulrasyid’s parents, and so many more have felt.

    Nathaniel Tan believes this world is full of people, he was born to love them all. He blogs atwww.jelas.info and tweets @NatAsasi

    Doc refuses notes to keep conspiracy agst Anwar from unraveling


    Anwar, Najib - once allies, now arch rivalsMalaysia Chronicle

    The controversial sodomy trial of Malaysian Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim descended further into farcical territory when it resumed on Thursday, with one of the doctors who had examined the complainant two years ago stoically refusing to refer to his clinical notes although he clearly could not remember the series of complex tests that were conducted.

    Everyone can see Dr Razali is struggling but if he was to ask to refer to his notes just once - that would be the end for the prosecutions case because it would straightaway entitle the defense to see the notes as well. And this is what the Najib administration is desperate to hide, Batu MP Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

    Obstacles to prevent conspiracy from unraveling

    Anwar has accused Prime Minister Najib Razak and his wife Rosmah Mansor for plotting the latest conspiracy in a bid to derail his political comeback.

    One of the many Sodomy II spoofsAnd the flimsiness of the evidence produced so far plus shenanigans such as what happened at court with the doctor this morning have convinced Malaysians and lawmakers from all around the world that Anwar was telling the truth but Najib may not.

    Perhaps knowing they were on shaky ground because Anwar has said he had alibis, the Najib administration right from the start obstructed the defense's access to key documents, including medical reports, chemists reports and witness statements, in clear defiance of United Nations fair-trial guidelines.

    The PM even tried to deny meeting the complainant Saiful Bukhair Azlan, although he was later forced to admit he had done so. It was only after meeting Najib tha! t Saiful lodged the police complaint that led to the governments prosecution of Anwar.

    On Thursday, lead defense counsel Karpal Singh began by repeating his request to be given access to the doctors notes. Again, Judge Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah refused to allow it, forcing Karpal to grill Dr Razali Ibrahim even though it was clear there were many instances where he could not remember at all.

    "What we wanted are the clinical notes. The preliminary medical report is not an issue," said Karpal.

    Even what sort of photos were taken, the doctor could not remember

    Karpal made it clear he did not believe the answers given by Razali were the same as those jotted down in the notes. Nonetheless, the judge refused to budge.

    Razali - unable to remember
    Among questions that Karpal and later his colleague Sankara Nair asked included whether Dr Razali was aware that Saiful had hours earlier undergone similar examination at Hospital Pusrawi, another government-operated facility in the Kuala Lumpur area.

    They also asked if lubricant had been used by Dr Razalis team, if Saiful had complained of pain when a proctoscopy was carried out, what type of length instrument was used and if photographs were taken of Saifuls private parts.

    At many instancea, the doctor had to admit he could not remember. But he still refused to call for his notes.
    The court has stood down for lunch and will resume at 2pm.

    Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

    Mighty Rajang running dangerously low

    By Joseph Tawie

    The Rajang River, once mighty and voluminous, is fast running low no thanks to the dry spell and the impoundment of the Bakun Dam.

    The water level has reached a critically low point, triggering alarm among residents along the river.

    The alert has gone out to the authorities to keep watch on more than 79 schools located downstream.

    The schools in Kapit, Song and Belaga collectively have 20,000 students and if it doesnt rain next week, then the schools will have to be closed, a spokesman of the state education department said.

    So far, the Kapit education office has not sent us an SOS nevetheless, we are on standby and closely monitoring the situation, he said.

    The dry spell coupled with the impoundment of the Bakun Dam has cut off river communications with several primary and secondary schools between Kapit and Belaga, resulting in severe shortage of food supplies.

    The record low water level in the once voluminous Rajang has created chaos in the state river transport network, disrupting the transport of goods, food and medicines to schools, stores and clinics in the interior.

    As a result, prices of food and drinks in Kapit, for instance, have shot up in recent days.

    Meanwhile, State Land Development Minister James Masing urged the relevant authorities such as the federal Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs to take stern action against shopkeepers seen to be profiteering from the situation.

    The authorities must do something now before the prices of food stuff and drinks go out of control, he said.

    Kapit SOS

    Meanwhile, Kapit MP, Alexande! r Nanta Linggi, sent an urgent plea to the federal government to intervene and help the people in Kapit affected by the low water level.

    The federal government should give greater attention and bigger allocation for the construction of access roads to longhouses in and along the Rajang River, he said in Parliament recently.

    It would appear that this low water level of the Rajang River and other tributaries is going to be a permanent feature. It will then be difficult to navigate, thus burdening the people, he said.

    Since the impounding of the Bakun Dam began on Oct 13, the water level at the Rajang River has consistently dropped.

    In Kapit itself, the water level, which was recorded at 6.7 metres above sea level on Oct 13, went down to below two metres five days later and continuing to drop. The normal water level is 8m.

    Second State Planning and Resource Management Minister Amar Awang Tengah Ali Hassan had reportedly expressed shock.

    He was quoted to have said that the government had expected the water level at the Rajang River to recede to a certain degree during the impoundment but not at the current level, which is totally unexpected.

    However, he said that nothing could be done as the impoundment could not be stopped.

    Kapit-Sibu roads

    Meanwhile, calls for the government to build the long-awaited Kapit-Sibu trunk road have resurfaced.

    Nanta, whose family has been spearheading the campaign for the Kapit-Sibu road for over 40 years, said the current development makes it imperative for alternative routes to be built linking the township to Sibu.

    In view of the latest development, the government needs to focus on the construction of the road linking Kapit to Song and Sibu, he said.

    Nanta was reportedly furious when allocations for the Kapit-Sibu truck road was not included ! in the N inth Malaysia Plan.

    According to a source close to the state government, planners under Chief Minister Taib Mahmud were not in favour of the trunk road as it will kill Kapit, a logging town. Kapit is better accessed by a long speedboat ride and visitors inevitably must spend the night in the town.

    Besides, a source said, a road was not economically viable as there are no economic activities between Sibu and Kapit eventhough the road will pass through hundreds of longhouses and thousands of acres of fertile land.

    Moreover, the government did not want to deprive express boats owners and tongkang that ply between Sibu and Kapit of their business.

    But more importantly, the source said, the government will be concentrating more on upstream development where, in addition to the Bakun Dam, there will be Murum and Baleh dams to be built.

    Roads and other infrastructure worth some RM7 billion will be built between Kapit and these areas which will form part of the Sarawak Corridor Renewal Energy, the source said.

    Thus, it appears that the Kapit-Sibu promise will remain an elusive dream.


    Filed under: Dams, Human rights, Politics Tagged: Anak Sarawak Bangsa Malaysia, Human rights, Native Customary Rights, Sarawak, Sarawak politics, Save Sarawak
    See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

    What others say when the court not keen in finding the truth.....

    'Doctor, why are you so afraid to look into your own notes? You give the impression that you have a lot of things to hide by being evasive.'

    Despite Karpal's urging, doc refuses to refer to notes...

    Ferdtan: Everything ties up. The judge says in his ruling that the court would not allow access to the clinical notes unless the witness (ie, Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim) is agreeable to looking at them. The doctor, who as a witness should be impartial, apparently tried his very best not to refer to his notes to frustrate the defence. Doctor, if you are speaking the truth, why are you so afraid to look into your own notes? You give the impression that you have a lot of things to hide by being evasive.

    Lim Chong Leong: This must be the first time in any court of law that the court is not interested in finding out the truth. In any fair system, the judge would have ordered the witness to refer to the notes, presumably made by him, to jog his memory or at least ensure that his testimony and his contemporaneous notes are consistent, and therefore the witness is credible.

    Here in Bolehland, the judge refuses admission of the notes and allows the witness to insist he cannot remember while the notes are there but all parties are forced to close their eyes to it. How can a judge refuse the defence the clinical notes in cross-examination? How can the judge and the witness both collaborate to the exclusion of the evidence by simply refusing to refer to it? This sandiwara (theatre) is becoming too obvious.

    Wira: Obviously the doctor is more interested in denying Karpal's access to his notes than being accurate in his testimony because of an earlier ruling by the court in rejecting the defence's application for those notes because they are not referred to in court. It becomes apparent today that the kangaroos are a! gain run ning wild.

    Josephine: This is a very interesting development. It seems so unusual for the doctor to persist in not referring to his notes. Die, die, also don't want to see. It makes you wonder what is written on those pages. Anyway, the people's court can see clearly what is going on.
    Judge denies Anwar access to clinical notes

    Disgusted: Why is the prosecution not tendering the initial medical report signed by three doctors, but the final medical report only? Was there something to hide? If Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu's entry into the country could be erased from immigration records at the airport, anything could be done to a government hospital's records. This is 1Malaysia Boleh.

    Mous: It is apparent who is doing what, to ensure the desired verdict. Why can't the prosecution's side be transparent and bare all the evidence that they have to nail Anwar if they are so confident of Sodomy II?

    Harrisman: Deny, deny. So what is in the notes that it cannot be made public? Somebody tried to manufacture something and is worried that it may give away something? If not, it should be open to all. Equal access to all evidence - that's a fundamental principle of natural justice.

    Z2X: Access to the clinical notes was not in the script given to the judge. He is so afraid the defence get their hands on it. Even a one-year-old kid can tell this whole trial is being run using Umno's script.

    JBGUY: This is an absolutely ludicrous case and a bunch of highly-paid actors doing the bidding of a puppet master. Unfortunately, it is the rakyat who will be bearing the costs. Each day, the case drags, more venom and hate is being spat at the perpetrators who orchestrated the charge.

    Etok
    : Ini bermakna lapuran awal ini telah diubah oleh mereka atas arahan atasan. Mereka sengaja tidak memberikan laporan ini pada awal dengan harapan Karpal Singh akan 'overlook' dan mer! eka meng atur permainan ini mengikut rentak Karpal. Anwar Ibrahim, saya amat simpati dengan apa yang berlaku.

    Correct, Correct, Correct
    : What is wrong with these Umno judges? Anything that Anwar requests is denied. Why this hide-and-seek game? This is simply disgusting.

    Just me: I cannot imagine what kind of trial this is. Is this a private trial or a public one run by the government ? Everything is so secretive and hush-hush. It is obvious they have something to hide. Are the prosecutors working for Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan or the government, or both?

    Ruben: Anwar's lawyers, please ensure that you check the preliminary medical report thoroughly to see if there is any tampering of the report. It is very suspicious that the prosecution is delaying the release of this report? In Bolehland, they can do anything to erase vital evidence. So please get your experts to check it. Also, I wish you all the best and please do your best. Anwar needs to be freed from the case as soon as possible. He has been treated unjustly for too long. We need him now to concentrate on his tasks as the opposition leader.

    BN: I have never supported Anwar, but come on, PM Najib Razak, let us win the next general elections like gentlemen. Anwar and Pakatan aren't so tough - we could win respectably, but not this way. This is not good for my children.

    Alan Goh: What kind of a trial is this when the request by the defence lawyers for the medical notes are denied by the judge? How to defend your client? Might as well save taxpayers' time and money and mete out the sentence already.

    Anonymous: This trial is no longer a joke. It sickens me to read that all requests by Anwar's lawyers are denied time and again. Where is the rule of law? What justice is this? How can one defend oneself when the judge is so biased and aligned with the prosecution? Imagine playing football where the referee is always favouring the other side. You'll! have no chance at all.

    Anonymous2
    : The court decision was made long ago in Putrajaya. All these actors are there to "draw the concentric circles for the target, after the arrow has been shot. This is justice for those who oppose them.

    source:malaysiakini

    cheers.
    Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

    ITS UP TO THE DEFENSE LAWYERS IN SODOMY ll TO 'BREAK THE BARRIER' IN SIGHTING THE MEDICAL NOTES ?


    Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim seem to be in the tight spot and in his bid to please his 'masters' is forced to speak in this manner. The 'masters' ultimate goal is to see that the accused, Anwar, GOES TO JAIL.
    So please be sympathetic to Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim ?
    Its up to the defense lawyers to 'get him in the corner' to refer to the notes?
    Can they (defense lawyers) do it ?
    Malaysian Unplugged's article claims:
    Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim, YOU are a Sickening Muslim and a Disgrace to Islam for Fearing to Face the Truth
    Thursday, October 28, 2010 Razali IbrahimRead here for more in Malaysiakini Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) general surgeon Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim REFUSED to look at the clinical notes taken despite NOT remembering parts of Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's three-hour medical examination he and two other doctors took on June 28, 2008.
    Dr Razali was badgered with several questions by senior lawyer Karpal Singh, who sought to entice him to refer to the clinical notes. At Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy trial Dr Razali persistently refused to take a look at the notes made by him or the other two doctors who had examined Saiful. Despite some uncertain answers, and being urged by Karpal many times, Dr Razali RE! FUSED to look at the clinical notes to help jog his memory. Karpal Singh had resorted this after High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah had earlier rejected the defence's application to obtain the clinical notes, but allowed its application to have a copy of the preliminary examination report, which was dated July 10, 2008. Karpal had to ask pointed questions in an attempt to glean information from the clinical notes, but on ALL occasions during the 30-minute questioning, Dr Razali repeatedly refused to refer to the report. We cannot force you to look but may persuade gently, Karpal said at times to Dr Razali. Normally, witnesses who cannot remember details of a particular incident are allowed by the court to refer to the notes they made on that case. On more than one occasion, solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden had objected to Karpal's line of questioning.Karpal pointed out that the full medical report which was dated July 13, 2008, has only two lines on Saiful's medical history.


    He argued that there certainly was much more on the matter during the doctors' three-hour examination of the complainant. All three doctors - hey had Dr Razali, clinical pathologist Dr Siew Sheue Feng and Dr Khairul Nizam Hassan - said texamined Saiful from 9pm and to slightly after midnight on July 29. Asked by Karpal whether he knew that Saiful was inspected earlier at the Pusrawi Hospital, Dr Razali said he knew there was an examination but did not know who or how many physicians had attended to the complainant.

    WHAT MALAYSIANS ARE SAYING Read here for more and here
    • Assalamualaikum wbt Dr Razali... semoga hentikan kelakuan yang memalukan diri doktor, mak bapa doktor, keluarga doktor, bangsa melayu, orang Islam dan kerjaya doktor perubatan. Ingat Allah dan sebagai doktor ingat mati.
    • Come on Dr, don't put your race to shame! Your incompetency wi! ll make others doubtful of what entrance qualification you had to study your medical degree, and how low quality is our country's own 'specialist' standard; no wonder we decide not to recognise MRCP anymore!
    • Dr Razali, you are not answerable to Kapal Singh, Anuar Ibrahim or Justice Zabidin or any mortal being in this earth. Damn it, you are answerable to Allah. Tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Allah shall protect and guide you and your family for akhirat. All those worldly things is only temporary but the akhirat is real like being born and death. Be a man of principle if you are the true believer of Allah and follower of Prophet Muhammad. You are special if you tell the truth. Believe me, I had faced the same situation and I am relieved that I had passed my test. Thanks to guidance of Allah. Yes Sir you have choice to tell the TRUTH or NOT. The truth will prevail and if you lie, think of your family that may succumb to your choice.
    • This is called Malaysian Justice..Defence cannot be given anything.If this case was in England it would have been thrown out long ago
    • The integrity of the medical fraternity in this country is brought to disrepute by Razali's action. What is the Malaysian Medical Council going to do about this? Nothing. As long as it is filled with doctors with ties to the government, you can bet your bottom dollar that they are going to be as effective and honest as the prosecuting team.
    • Dr Razali, you are not answerable to Kapal Singh, Anuar Ibrahim or Justice Zabidin or any mortal being in this earth. Damn it, you are answerable to Allah. Tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Allah shall protect and guide you and your family for akhirat. All those worldly things is only temporary but the akhirat is real like being born and death. Be a man of principle if you are the true believer of Allah and follower of Prophet Muhammad. You are s! pecial i f you tell the truth. Believe me, I had faced the same situation and I am relieved that I had passed my test. Thanks to guidance of Allah. Yes Sir you have choice to tell the TRUTH or NOT. The truth will prevail and if you lie, think of your family that may succumb to your choice.
    • Razali you are not sitting for the SPM Exams to be afraid to refer to notes that you yourself wrote.. This is about you as a witness giving evidence in a court of law stupid. Where were you schooled anyway?. You are a STUPID IDIOTIC NUT OF THE FIRST ORDER.
    • Today you are facing Karpal and those present in court but from this day on, you will face the people's court and at the end of your days, there is the court of final judgement. You have been given a chance to redeem yourself. Will you do it, tomorrow? It is never too late.
    • Oh my god!!! First our DPM said he cannot take action against a headmistress, now.. we have ajudge that said he can't order or instruct a witness to refer to the report.. oh my, my!!!
    • What shameful conduct from the doctor, the DPP and the judge? Disgusting situation in a country I call my own. Does not the AG realise that he is a joke internationally. But it does bring home the point that the BN/UMNO government is terrified of Anwar's PKR leading the charge in the next GE.
    • Dr. Razali, I don't know what medical school you went to but i'm quite sure your medical training is not very complete or up to date. You probably were'nt taught about Bioethics when you were a student doctor. Doctors are taught about the four sacred bioethical principals which are 1) Autonomy, 2) Beneficence, 3) Non-maleficence and most importantly 4) Justice- the consequences of your actions must be fair to the patient or to the wider community. None of this ring a bell? You were probably brought up on Biro Tata Negara brainwashing then.... Please do not brin! g shame to your noble profession, doctor razali.
    • Cant remember the details but steadfastly refused to refer to his own clinical notes. This is something extraordinary. Many of those in the medical profession especially in govt sector is compromised as suspected by the public. Is it reasonable not to refer to your own notes if you cant remember them exactly?
    • Dr Razali's face exposes the true nature of this person--a totally untrusted and a congenital liar. I dont know how he can become a medical doctor-- a disgrace to the noble profession. He cant remember the details but at the same time refuse to look at the clinical notes. A clear cut case of conspiracy.
    • This must be the first time in any court of law that the court is not interested in finding out the truth. In any fair system, the judge would have ordered the witness to refer to the notes, presumably made by him, to jog his memory or at least ensure that his testimony and his contemporaneous notes are consistent, and therefore the witness is credible. Here in Bolehland, the judge refuses admission of the notes and allows the witness to insist he cannot remember while the notes are there but all parties are forced to close their eyes to it.How can a judge refuse the defence the clinical notes in cross-examination? How can the judge and the witness both collaborate to the exclusion of the evidence by simply refusing to refer to it? This sandiwara (theatre) is becoming too obvious.
    • Why is the prosecution not tendering the initial medical report signed by three doctors, but the final medical report only? Was there something to hide? If Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu's entry into the country could be erased from immigration records at the airport, anything could be done to a government hospital's records. This is 1Malaysia Boleh.
    • Deny, deny. So what is in the notes that it cann! ot be ma de public? Somebody tried to manufacture something and is worried that it may give away something? If not, it should be open to all. Equal access to all evidence - that's a fundamental principle of natural justice.
    • Access to the clinical notes was not in the script given to the judge. He is so afraid the defence get their hands on it. Even a one-year-old kid can tell this whole trial is being run using Umno's script.
    • This is an absolutely ludicrous case and a bunch of highly-paid actors doing the bidding of a puppet master. Unfortunately, it is the rakyat who will be bearing the costs. Each day, the case drags, more venom and hate is being spat at the perpetrators who orchestrated the charge.
    • Ini bermakna lapuran awal ini telah diubah oleh mereka atas arahan atasan. Mereka sengaja tidak memberikan laporan ini pada awal dengan harapan Karpal Singh akan 'overlook' dan mereka mengatur permainan ini mengikut rentak Karpal. Anwar Ibrahim, saya amat simpati dengan apa yang berlaku.
    • What is wrong with these Umno judges? Anything that Anwar requests is denied. Why this hide-and-seek game? This is simply disgusting.
    • I cannot imagine what kind of trial this is. Is this a private trial or a public one run by the government ? Everything is so secretive and hush-hush. It is obvious they have something to hide. Are the prosecutors working for Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan or the government, or both?
    • I have never supported Anwar, but come on, PM Najib Razak, let us win the next general elections like gentlemen. This is not good for my children.
    • This trial is no longer a joke. It sickens me to read that all requests by Anwar's lawyers are denied time and again. Where is the rule of law? What justice is this? How can one defend oneself when the judge is so biased and aligned wi! th the p rosecution? Imagine playing football where the referee is always favouring the other side. You'll have no chance at all.
    • The court decision was made long ago in Putrajaya. All these actors are there to "draw the concentric circles for the target, after the arrow has been shot. This is justice for those who oppose them.

    See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

    Of megalomaniacs and mega towers

    No, we do not need to trumpet our megalomanic tendencies. We need to look at our immediate needs and prioritise as a nation that is losing its sense of direction guided by a regime that is intoxicated with power derived from the orchestration of the archaic strategy of divide and rule using race as a tool.

    No, we cannot afford another tower of raw power.

    A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

    Dr. Azly Rahman

    Here is an excerpt from the Facebook campaign, now numbering to almost 160,000 members, rejecting the Menara Warisan proposal:

    Rakyat Malaysia mengatakan TAK NAK kepada Menara Warisan 100-tingkat yang memakan kos RM5,000,000,000 yang dicadangkan oleh PM Najib Razak dalam Bajet 2011. Malaysians saying no to the RM5-billion 100-storey Mega Tower proposed by PM Najib in the 2011 budget. Malaysia needs better education, better health care, better public transportation, safer neighbourhood, cleaner water, but not taller building. We don't need another white elephant!

    NONE"Malaysia perlukan pendidikan, perubatan dan pengangkutan awam yang lebih baik, jiran-tetangga yang lebih selamat, air yang lebih bersih, dan bukannya bangunan yang lebih tinggi. Kita tidak perlukan seekor lagi gajah putih yang membazirkan wang rakyat jelata. Wahai, saudara-saudari warga Malaysia sekalian, biar kita bersatu tak mengira kaum, agama, budaya, bahasa, pendirian politik, geografi atau kelas. Biar kita bersatu dan membela nasib endiri. Merdeka! Merdeka! Merdeka!

    I am beginning to sense that the issue will contribute to the downfall of the current regime of Barisan Nasional in the next general election. It is as if the last BN hurrah to showcase megalomania and illusions of grandeur will be a rallyin! g point for the masses/rakyat fatigued by he struggle to survive the daily grind while robber barons rob, dine, and wine.

    The issue however is, developmental priority and what lies behind the proposal and what the proposed tower signifies. It is a question of political-economy and semiotics of developmentalism.

    Even the name Warisan begs the question of authentic history of Malaysia and reminds me of the propaganda song Warisan (Anak kecil main api ) used by the indoctrination outfit Biro Tata Negara to create unthinking and unquestioning and mentally-domesticated citizens out of the civil servants especially.

    Mega tower and idiotic pride

    I wrote this as my Facebook status when I read about the proposal:

    Tall towers do not symbolise progress. If the Malaysian government insists on otherwise, stick two toothpicks on top of the Petronas Twin Towers to make the building tallest in Malaysia, taller than the previous twin towers. Malaysia can then be known as the Toothpick Capital of the world ar

    Or - a cheaper path towards grandiose-ness is, as a Facebook friend of mine suggested, is to build two high rise towers on top of Mount Kinabalu.

    The ruling regime is suffering from a complex called idiotic pride; trumpeting grandioseness on the outside but trampling democracy inside. I see the image of the oppressors smiling at the camera globally while an army boot is on the head of a screaming citizen on the ground, locally.

    This is the image of how the nation is responding to the five-billion ringgit question: The Warisan Tower, proposed as yet another megalomanic project to boost a national ego unprepared for a regime change.

    poverty malayInstead of fixing the education system, attending to abject poverty in East Malaysia, poverty everywhere in general, addressing environmental degradation, improving race relations, fixi! ng the j udiciary, battling crime by instilling ethics in law enforcement, giving educational financial aid to deserving Malaysians of ALL races, the focus of the developmental agenda is on more towers, palaces, useless real estate projects, and translating meaningless developmental policies derived from a poorly-understood idea of development.

    This goes to the ultra-modernisation of our national defense system itself. We didn't even need to 'modernise the armed forces' - the enemy is inside the country, amongst the corrupt politicians and robber barons, not outside of us amongst the internally-problematic Asean nations themselves.

    In the history of human civilisations, the erecting of tall structures has in it the question of the winners and losers in history and of megalomanic rulers.

    Glorifying tyrants, sacrificing the masses

    From the ancient architectures of symbolic power such as the pyramids of Gizeh, the temples of the Incas and the Mayans, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Great Wall of China, the Collosus of Rhodes, and many more - all these are about glorifying tyrants and sacrificing the masses. Millions died unknown in history whilst names such as Ramses, Shah Jehan, Shih Huang-Ti, and Nebuchadnezzar are remembered for their fame or infamy.

    klcc petronas towerIn the history of postmodern civilisations, the erecting of the tallest structures has become a race for idiotic pride and madness. The Eiffel Tower, the Empire State building, the Sears Tower, and the Petronas Twin Towers, Xujjahui in China, International Commerce Centre in Hong Kong, Shanghai World Financial Centre, Taipei 101, Burj Khalifa, and the proposed Lotte World II - all these are symbols of idiotic pride of the both the capitalist and socialist worlds.

    Down below these towers lie a population characterised by marked disparity between the haves and the have! -nots, a nd of those living in decaying urban slums.

    No, we do not need to trumpet our megalomanic tendencies. We need to look at our immediate needs and prioritise as a nation that is losing its sense of direction guided by a regime that is intoxicated with power derived from the orchestration of the archaic strategy of divide and rule using race as a tool.

    No, we cannot afford another tower of raw power.

    _________________________

    DR AZLY RAHMAN, who was born in Singapore and grew up in Johor Bahru, holds a Columbia University (New York) doctoral degree in International Education Development and Masters degrees in the fields of Education, International Affairs, Peace Studies, and Communication. He has taught more than 40 courses in six different departments and has written more than 300 analyses on Malaysia. His teaching experience spans both in Malaysia and in the United States and in a wide range of teaching context; from elementary to graduate education. He currently resides in the United States.

    See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

    Reaping Our Racial Harvest

    October 28, 2010

    www.sun2surf.com.my

    Reaping Our Racial Harvest

    by K.K.Tan

    BOTH the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister stated just before the UMNO General Assembly last week that there should be no more discussion or debate about the social contract and other issues pertaining to race in our country. It was wishful thinking, for over the next two days, delegate after delegate at the Assembly, spoke out on racial issues. Outside the Assembly, the race debate raged on, especially over the Internet.

    1Malaysia Message is not lost among UMNO Delegates

    UMNO delegates, like others, should be allowed to speak out honestly on how they feel on the (race) issue without offending the sensitivities of others. The racial tone at this years assembly was milder or more conciliatory than previous years. The pre-assembly briefings by the party president, Youth and Wanita leaders seem to have some effect in ensuring that the 1Malaysia message is not lost among its members.

    Datuk Seri Najib Razak gave a strong assurance at this assembly that the special position of the Malays, as enshrined in the Constitution, cannot be taken away while reminding the members to respect the rights of the non-Malays as stated in the same Constitution. It may not seem much but what the prime minister did was significant. For the first time, he was openly addressing a major anxiety among many Malays, which has become a stumbling block to promoting 1Malaysia. Although his message has allayed the concern of his members, it would take much more to put the issue to rest once and for all.

    Promoting Positive Race Relations

    The issue is really HOW race debates should be conducted. In the interest of promoting positive race relations, we should not suppress genuine feelings from being expressed legitimately or sweep them under the carpet. Our government should let our people of all races express ! their ho nest fears or worries as long as they do not resort to racial slurs or insults. Our political leaders should reach out and engage with each other and also with all those with such genuine concerns in an open manner.

    One can argue that it is a good sign of a more mature civil society that lately more people are speaking out honestly but sensitively on how they feel about race issues rather than just keeping such feelings to themselves and their loved ones.

    We should not let a situation develop where there is a silent build-up of pent-up frustrations and anger until an explosive point. Neither should we be too free to allow the race debate to degenerate to a point of being destructive, abusive and derogatory. The government should enforce the zero tolerance against racial slurs and insults using our laws.

    Race Relations Act?

    If necessary, our policymakers should consider enacting a new and comprehensive law (such as a Race Relations Act) to curb cases of racial slur, abuse, instigation and other racialist or chauvinistic behaviour. We need to deal appropriately with the spoilers of racial unity who have a hidden agenda to instigate, provoke, divide and distract. In any kind of human relations, it is always harder to build goodwill and understanding but easy to undermine and destroy and these spoilers, who are present in every society, know it.

    Todays negative race relations can be mostly attributed to more than five decades of racial politicking since independence. We reap what we sow. It would be pointless for political parties, including those which are only multi-racial in name, to point fingers at each other for the deteriorated state of race relations.

    Few people are questioning the rationale of having race-based parties at the time of independence as the state of social development among the various communities might have required such an arrangement for greater efficiency in representation and governance. But there was not much effort! in prom oting multiracial politics and little attempt to address the growing income disparity between the races in the post-Merdeka period until it reached a boiling point on May 13, 1969.

    Social Justice and National Unity

    Social justice is an essential element of national unity; the other two elements being equality and mutual respect. The formulation of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1971, to address the social inequality and injustice by assisting the majority of the poor bumiputras to be more self reliant and competitive, was the first response to the May 13 crisis on the economic front. At the same time, on the political front, the formation of the 10-party National Front from the original three race-based parties of the Alliance to include multiracial parties (at least in name), signalled a move towards multiracial politics and representation.

    However, for the next 40 years or so after that, not much was done by most political parties to move away from racial politics until recently. There were several attempts by the government to promote meritocracy and multiracialism such as the Bangsa Malaysia concept. The most promising one so far is 1Malaysia.

    NEP to NEM: Politics of Inclusion

    The progression from the NEP to the new NEM may have obstacles and challenges but the government must be determined and have the political will to see it through in an inclusive manner, without letting any sector feel a sense of loss or fear.

    The NEP was perhaps one of the most noble and elaborate social engineering schemes ever proposed anywhere in the world at that time but its implementation was fraught with problems and abuses to a point that many people have accused it of being bastardised.

    The part failure of one programme (NEP) should not be an excuse to deter the government from abandoning its objective of helping the poor of all races. Hopefully, the lessons learnt from the mistakes of the NEP would enable the NEM to! better address the social inequalities and poverty without necessarily compromising the economic growth and competitiveness of the country.

    The other political aspect of managing race relations is to steadily move away from race-based politics and representation. What might be politically expedient at the time of independence may not be so today. There is now a greater public recognition that intensive race-based representation in the long run is outdated, divisive and economically destructive for the country in facing the new challenges. It would certainly undermine our journey to achieve 1Malaysia.

    Why cant a Malaysian of a certain ethnic origin represent or speak out for the welfare of Malaysians of other ethnic origins. Why cant the relative poverty of the bumiputras be equally the concern of others as well? Why must the representation of an ethnic group be monopolised by people of the same ethnicity? Such race-based political representation is not even stated in the constitution. The world of today and the new world of tomorrow would demand that we evolve towards multiracial or cross-racial representation sooner rather than later.

    It would be a positive way forward for our emerging civil, plural and democratic society when all ethnic groups would be peacefully and respectfully divided with cross-racial unity and representation. In such a scenario, we would support, agree or disagree with each other based on policies, ideologies, principles and position on issues rather than just race.

    A generation from now, let us not look back and start pointing fingers at each other again for not doing the right things. If only we can all develop a positive and inclusive approach and outlook from now, we should be able to reap the beauty of our multiracial harvest by then.

    *The writer, the CEO of a Kuala Lumpur-based think-tank and strategic consultancy firm, like many others, believes that there is only one race the human race. He can be contacted at kktan22@hotmail.com. Comments: ! letters@ thesundaily.com


    Letter & Opinion From Joe Public
    Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...