jump to navigation

Mengapa Ketua Pembangkang Tidak Membuat Pendirian Tegas Dalam Isu LBGT dan Seksualiti Merdeka? November 3, 2011

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, Islam, politik, sosial.
Tags: , , , , ,
2 comments

Setelah beberapa minggu berlalunya HIMPUN yang mana banyak pihak yang membuat komen dan analisa yang pelbagai, IB tekun meneliti suatu peristiwa penting yang bakal menguji sekali lagi “keimanan” kita.

Namun sebentar tadi, dalam sidang medianya, Timbalan Ketua Polis Negara, Khalid Abu Bakar telah menghentikan semua aktiviti yang menguji sensitiviti kita semua ini. Maka tidaklah melarat tinjauan yang perlu IB teliti.

IB memerhatikan apakah yang akan disuarakan oleh ahli-ahli politik dalam meniti isu yang rumit bagi menjaga hati para pengundi dan sentimen yang bakal dimainkan oleh sesetengah pihak.

IB juga perhatikan laman-laman media alternatif serta laman-laman blog yang mengulas isu-isu politik dan suara pembangkang.

Laman Malaysiakini tidak syak lagi banyak memainkan untuk meraih simpati kepada golongan LBGT atau dalam bahasa yang lebih tepat ialah “songsang fitrah”. Harakahdaily pula ada menyiar beberapa kenyataan termasuk dari Nik Aziz, Ketua Muslimat, Pemuda dan juga oleh MAPIM.

Sayangnya Tranung Kite (TKO) agak sunyi dalam menyedarkan bahaya dan ancaman yang patut diawasi oleh umat Islam dalam isu yang dibawa oleh beberapa NGO yang kononnya berselindung di bawah hak asasi manusia menganjurkan acara-acara menuntut kebebasan songsang fitrah mereka.

Tidak ada satupun posting berkaitan LBGT dimuatkan dalam TKO semenjak November 2011.

Nik Aziz agak jelas mengasingkan dirinya dari Ambiga yang menjadi antara jurubicara festival ini yang bakal dirasmi beliau sendiri.

Pemuda PAS konsisten dengan pendirian mereka dalam menyuarakan kepekaan mereka dalam isu sensitif begini sepertimana yang telah Ust. Nasharuddin bertegas ketika menyokong HIMPUN (namun janji beliau untuk hadir HIMPUN tidak kesampaian dek dihalang oleh Presidennya sendiri dalam perbualan telefon di pagi hari HIMPUN itu – agak menyesal juga Ust. Nasha gatal tangan menekan telefon pagi itu).

Siti Zailah Mohd Yusof, Ketua Dewan Muslimat PAS Pusat (DMPP) membuat kenyataan menentang keras program Seksualiti Merdeka 2011 kerana bertentangan dengan cara hidup semua agama khususnya Islam.

Manakala blog tokoh-tokoh politik PAS lain tidak menyentuh langsung isu LBGT ini, baik Khalid Samad, Hanipa Maidin atau Dr. Zul. Dr. Zul hanya sekadar tweet bahawa “Perkara 11 FC: Agama Islam, semua agama dan moral philosophies larang gay dsbnya.. “, beliau sendiri tidak membuat suatu pendirian tegas membantah Seksualiti Merdeka dan tweet tersebut tercetus sebagai latahan apabila dijolok dengan dituduh sebagai “… Poodle DAP. Sokong Ambiga masa Bersih 2.0 skrg masih sokong?

Untuk tokoh-tokoh DAP bantah memang kita jangka sukar sedikit. Tidak ada dalam blog mereka (Karpal, KLS dan LGE ataupun laman rasmi parti) menyentuh isu ini, kecuali jika mereka tweet, yang itu IB tidak ikuti.

Yang menjadi persoalan besar IB dan mungkin ramai juga orang lain ialah menantikan suatu patah ayat dari Anwar berhubung isu ini. IB tidak temui sebarang komen atau posting di dalam blog Anwar, semenjak bulan November ini walaupun terdapat beberapa posting dan komen pada hari ini – semuanya sekitar isu lain.

Namun apabila diikuti tweet beliau:

@anwaribrahim: Dijelaskan:tdk setuju@MZuhairy: DS kita kena halang Seksualiti Merdeka 2011.. Lawan tetap lawan..Jum ? (7 hours ago)

Apa yang IB faham: Anwar tidak setuju halang Seksualiti Merdeka apabila menjawab tweet MZuhairy: “DS kita kena halang Seksualiti Merdeka 2011

Terdahulu;

@anwaribrahim: Kita tdk terlibat dan tdk menyokong @sakriibrahim: @realDrMAZA sewajarnya kita tidak perlu syak lagi pada ambiga… (10 hours ago)

Faham IB: Anwar tidak terlibat dan juga tidak menyokong dalam mempersoalkan motif Ambiga (dalam hal penganjuran Seksualiti Merdeka?)

Betul ke ini Anwar?

Seperti satu komen yang IB baca dalam Mkini ketika mula-mula hebuh video Eskay 1 keluar. Seorang penyokong tegar Anwar mempertikaikan kesahihan video tersebut berdasarkan “takkan Anwar sebodoh itu untuk menjalankan aktiviti seks luar nikah ketika mana kes Liwat II sedang berjalan di mahkamah” (bahasa dalam komen itu telah IB lembutkan).

Dan begitulah juga komen seorang peguam mempersoalkan sikap “berdiam diri” Anwar atau tidak bersuara lantangnya Anwar dalam isu songsang fitrah sebegini apabila kredibiliti beliau dalam isu ini turut dipersoalkan. Persoalan beliau adalah “apakah birds of like feather flock together?”

Bukankah ianya bakal memberi impak dan kepercayaan kuat bagi Pak-Pak Haji di kampung dan orang-orang awam kepada Anwar bahawa beliau seorang yang jauh dari amalan yang dituduh dalam kes Liwat I dan kes Liwat II jika Anwar mengambil pendirian berani dan tegas menentang gerakan LBGT? Bukankah itu satu political mileage dari kalangan agamawan dan sahabat-sahabat dalam PAS?

Apakah Anwar lebih penting menjaga hati puak-puak liberalis, pluralis dan sekular demi untuk PRU13?

Sekadar merenungi masib Pak Sheikh ni.

Sekian, IB

… oh, lupa nak sebut dalam blog Nurul Izzah pun sama dengan Papanya, dan tweet pun langsung tiada bantah Seksualiti Merdeka

4 Orang Saksi vs Penjelasan Qarinah July 15, 2011

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, Ketelusan, politik.
Tags: , , , , ,
2 comments

Apabila menonton kedua-dua video ini IB lebih percaya dengan penjelasan seorang yang berilmu dalam bidang agama lagi hafiz.

Tuan-puan tonton sendiri dan nilai.

Tonton yang ini dulu.

Kemudian tonton dan amati penjelasan aspek lain yang terlalu ramai orang pejam mata dan tutup telinga.

Rakaman video kurang memuaskan. Kalau pening bila tonton – dengar sahaja pun memadai. Kita nak dengar hujjahnya.

Sekian, IB

WikiLeaks: Singapore believes Anwar guilty of sodomy December 12, 2010

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar.
Tags: , , , , ,
add a comment

Sin Chew quotes from AFP …

SINGAPORE, December 12, 2010 (AFP) – Singapore leaders believe Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim had sex with a male aide in a honey trap set by his enemies, according to leaked US cables published by WikiLeaks on Sunday.

A US state department cable dated November 2008 and given by the whistleblower to Australia’s Fairfax media group detailed intelligence gathered by Australian and Singaporean intelligence on the opposition leader’s case.

“The Australians said that Singapore’s intelligence services and (former prime minister) Lee Kuan Yew have told ONA (Office of National Assessments) in their exchanges that opposition leader Anwar ‘did indeed commit the acts for which he is currently indicted’,” the cable read.

It added that Singapore reached its conclusion based on “technical intelligence,” which a Fairfax report said was likely to involve intercepted communications.

“ONA assessed, and their Singapore counterparts concurred, ‘it was a set-up job and he probably knew that, but walked into it anyway’,” the cable wrote.

Anwar, 63, has vehemently denied sodomising his aide, 25-year-old Mohamad Saiful Bukhari Azlan, claiming he was the victim of a political conspiracy.

He faces 20 years in prison if found guilty of sodomy, a serious crime in Muslim-dominated Malaysia.

Tian Chua, vice-president of Anwar’s People’s Justice Party, dismissed the revelations as “hearsay”.

“There is no doubt that this is a trumped-up charge,” he said. “If the claim is true… it would have been relatively easy for the government to prove it.”

“We cannot depend on what the foreign intelligence officials say. The question is whether the government has evidence to convict Anwar in court.”

Human Rights Watch has urged Malaysia to drop the charges against Anwar, condemning the case as a “charade of justice”.

Anwar, a former deputy premier, was sacked in 1998 and jailed on separate sodomy and corruption counts.

His sodomy conviction was later overturned and he was freed after serving six years in jail, enabling him to mount a political comeback as head of the opposition.

Anwar is first Malaysian ‘victim’ of Wikileaks December 12, 2010

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar.
Tags: , , , , ,
add a comment

The Star reports …

PETALING JAYA: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has become the first Malaysian “victim” of WikiLeaks.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported Sunday that leaked US state department cable revealed that Singaporean intelligence officials told their Australian counterparts that Anwar had engaged in the conduct for which he was accused of, and that his sodomy charges were the result of a “set-up job”.

However, the Opposition Leader tweeted his comments later Sunday, saying: “Source? Polis SB Msia. Bukti tak ada (Who is the source? Malaysian police special branch. There’s no proof of any such thing)”.

According to the Herald, the cable, dated November 2008, was one of several that dealt with the explosive private views of senior Singaporean officials.

Issued to Fairfax newspapers by WikiLeaks, the cable stated, “The Australians said that Singapore’s intelligence services … told [the Office of National Intelligence] in their exchanges that [Mr Anwar] ‘did indeed commit the acts for which he is currently indicted’.’’

It added that the Singaporeans told the office they made this assessment on the basis of “technical intelligence’’ which most likely meant intercepted communications.

The office also said that Anwar’s political enemies had engineered the circumstances from which the sodomy charges arose.

‘’[The office] assessed, and their Singapore counterparts concurred, ‘it was a set-up job and he probably knew that, but walked into it anyway’,’’ the cable stated, according to the paper.

Anwar dan Pluralisme Agama April 6, 2010

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, Islam.
Tags: , , , , ,
4 comments

Apa sudah jadi Pak Sheikh? Apakah DSAI kini telah masuk dalam lubang pluralisme agama?

Berikut adalah teks ucapan beliau di London School of Economics, March 18, 2010 yang disiarkan di blog beliau.

Sebelum ini IB mengulas juga:

Sekian, IB

p.s. (16Dis10) – komen IB terkini dengan merujuk kepada perkembangan semalam: Anwar dan Pluralisme Agama Lagi?

p.s. (7Jan12) – komen terkini IB selepas isu ini meletup lagi di Utusan Malaysia pada 5 Jan 2012: Mengulangi Bahawa Anwar Itu Cekal Dengan Pendirian Pluralisme Agamanya

********

Let me begin with a cryptic line from T.S. Eliot’s “Burnt Norton”:

Go, go, go, said the bird: Human kind cannot bear very much reality.

But I say bear it we must for indeed, it is a stark reality of our world that certain religious groups hold that only certain fundamental doctrines may lead to salvation. This exclusivist outlook unfortunately cuts across the board as between religions as well as within the denominations. In Christendom, we have seen the schisms and consequent upheavals arising from this sense of exclusivity. Within Islam, Sunni, Shiite and Sufi denominations have had a chequered history and continue to present the world with a scenario of violence and bloodshed. The backlash against Muslim migration to Europe has become more acrid in the aftermath of 9/11 and 7/7 with right wing politcal parties benefitting from the new bout of xenophobia and fearmongering. France’s ban on the burqa has elicited heated emotion on both sides, but many Muslims scratched our heads in disbelief when Switzerland outlawed minarets.

Back in the 13th century, the mystical poet Jelaluddin al-Rumi wrote in the Masnavi:

The lamps are different but the Light is the same, it comes from Beyond; If thou keep looking at the lamp, thou art lost; for thence arises the appearance of number and plurality.

Those verses couldn’t be more relevant for us today. Despite rancorous debates linking religion to conflict and discrimination, it remains a fact that at a personal level religious experience boils down to certain universal concepts. Where does man come from? What is his purpose? What happens when he dies? The spiritual path subscribes us to a universal quest for truth and the pursuit of justice and virtue. We rejoice in beauty, both within ourselves and in what surrounds us. We long for knowledge, peace and security amid the mysteries and uncertainties of the universe. In our disjointed world filled with ugliness, violence and injustice, religion gives all of mankind an opportunity to realize values which unify humanity, despite the great diversity of climes and cultures.

Dante – one of the great poets of the Christian tradition – had much to say about this issue. Surrounded by civil strife that tore asunder the landscape of his 14th century Italian countryside, Dante was well acquainted with factionalism and the struggles for power between the Lords Temporal and the Lords Spiritual. Seeing the damage inflicted by the attempts to overcome these divisions he perceived a solution that was not merely political in nature. Writing in Monarchia he said that the ultimate aims in life are twofold – happiness in this worldly life as well as happiness in the eternal life basking in the vision of God. The attainment of these two goals would come with great difficulty:

“only when the waves of seductive greed are calmed and the human race rests free in the tranquillity of peace.”

Dante’s vision of universal peace could be achieved only when the nations of the world unite in an undivided planetary polity. This was surely a utopian dream but being European it is worth noting that his dream was not of an imperial Europe. Nor did he envision the Church expanding beyond its walls. The ruling authority in this utopian landscape would be the faculty of human reason, linking Dante’s vision directly to the philosophical outlook of Muslim luminaries including al-Farabi and Ibn Rushd.

Of course such a new world order never materialized. On the contrary if there is an enduring legacy of Enlightenment thought on the political geography of the world it is the dissection of empires and dynasties into individual, competing nation states rather than a greater unification.

Much blood was spilled to create and then protect these boundaries. Despite attempts by some to purify their lands, the boundaries drawn around the nation-state have been blurred by the advent of modern transportation and communication. Today’s world is perhaps more diverse and integrated than was the case in the golden age of Muslim Spain, where Christians, Jews and Muslims lived in peaceful harmonious coexistence. And yet we can hardly say that the overwhemling result of this new connectivity is peace and harmony.

Today, freedom of religion without which there can be no religious pluralism, is an entrenched constitutional liberty in the established democracies. As such, favouring one religion over another or granting it a position at the expense of others may be considered as being against the spirit of religious pluralism. Yet this still happens even in certain established democracies in Europe while in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia this ambivalence has been virtually taken for granted until recently.

This is why the discourse on religious pluralism must deal with the fundamental question of freedom of religion and by association the freedom of conscience. The question arises as to whether it is the diversity of religions which makes the divided world more divided or the denial of religious freedom that causes it.

I believe I’m not alone in saying that for religious pluralism to flourish in a divided world, it is morally unacceptable to say to people of other faiths:

We believe in our God and we believe we are right; you believe in your God, but what you believe in is wrong.

If the Qur’anic proclamation that there is no compulsion in religion is to mean anything then it must surely be that imposition of one’s faith unto others is not Islamic. But to say this is not to deny the reality of religious diversity for the Qur’an also tells us clearly:

“O people! Behold, we have created you from a male and a female and have made you into nations and tribes to that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.”

The Guru Granth Sahib tells us that he who sees that all spiritual paths lead to the One shall be freed but he who utters falsehood shall descend into hellfire and burn. The blessed and the sanctified are those who remain absorbed in Truth.

Whatever the religion, whether it be Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism and many others, I believe that the higher truths which go beyond mere practice and ritual all converge on the singular truth: and that is from God we were sent forth and unto God shall we return.

Yet certain leaders of the major world religions continue to make exclusivist claims to the eternal truths rather than accepting the commonality that binds us. If we accept that there can be unity in diversity, religious pluralism can therefore be a unifying force, not a cause of division. That is the way to take us away from darkness into light, from war to peace and from hatred and evil to love and kindness.

As for Muslims, there continues to be the problem of those who reject the value of free speech, free press, democracy, and freedom of conscience. They see the culture of religious pluralism as part of a grand conspiracy by ‘others’ particularly Christians to proselytize and convert Muslims. Pluralism is also a ploy of smuggling Western-style democracy through the back door.

But this is actually an aberration when it comes to the application of Muslim jurisprudence. Outside certain concerns of public policy there is no religious obligation upon Muslims to impose the laws and values of Muslims on the entire society. The Ottoman millet system is but one example of a system crafted by a Muslim state which was grounded in the principle of respect the recognized the rights of non-Muslims to follow freely the dictates of their religion. It was recognised that this was essential to maintain harmony in a pluralistic environment of an expanding empire. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyah, an eight century Hanbali legal scholar offers us a more vivid case. In the case of the Zoroastrian practice of self-marriage whereby men are encouraged to marry their mothers, this is an act deemed morally repugnant from the Muslim perspective. When asked whether the Muslim state should recognise such unions, however, al-Jawziyah affirmed the rights of the Zoroastrians provided their cases not be presented in a Muslim court and that the said practices are deemed permissible within their own legal tradition. So, he said, the Muslim state has no business to interfere.

It is unfortunate that some of the wisdom of Islam’s classical scholarship are forgotten. Ideological rigidity remains the stumbling block to progress and reform. Muslims must break free from the old practices of cliché-mongering and name calling, move beyond tribal or parochial concerns. A rediscovery of the religion’s inherent grasp of pluralism is very much in need.

The Qur’an declares: Say He is Allah, the One, Allah, the eternally besought of all. One of the greatest medieval Torah scholars, Maimonides, also known by the Arabic moniker Abu Imran Musa bin ‘Ubaidallah Maimun al-Qurtubi, in expounding the unity of God in Judaism said: God is one and there is no other oneness like His. With reference to the phrase “hallowed be thy name” from the Lord’s Prayer (Matt. 6:9), the late Swami Prabhavananda wrote that God’s name can be viewed as a mantra, the repetition of which both confers spiritual power and purifies the aspirant’s heart and mind. By means of this practice, God’s “name is experienced as living and conscious, as one with God—and illumination is attained.”

Historically, Muslims viewed the Qur’an as addressing the intellect as well as the spirit. It set out the order in the universe, the principles and certitudes within it, and demanded a thorough examination of them so that we can be certain of the validity of its claims and message. This pursuit would inevitably lead to the realization of the eternal principles of the Divine Unity which in turn springs forth from the Divine Laws. But the Shari’ah was never cast in stone and evolves continuously through this dynamic process. In order to maintain a middle ground, the essential ingredients of an Islamic methodology must then be conceived in a holistic perspective which will be universal and eternal in appeal.

It is said that pluralism in a divided world serves only to cement the schisms leading to the tired and tiring refrain of the ‘clash of civilizations’ akin to the beating of ‘an antique drum’. This seems to be the metaphor that appeals to the imagination of historians and political scientists. The upshot is a clash of visions of history, perceptions, and images which in turn brings about differing and often opposing interpretations, not just of history, but world views. Nevertheless, as Eliot says:

History may be servitude, History may be freedom

We should therefore disabuse ourselves of this notion of the clash between civilizations and refocus our attention on the clash that has been brewing within the umma. We see a more dangerous and portentous clash as one that is intra-civilizational – between the old and the new, the weak and the strong, the moderates and the fundamentalists and between the modernists and the traditionalists.

If we look at history as servitude, we could gloss over the historical perspective and consign it to the realm of academia on the ground that we are already in the 21st century.

Turkey and Indonesia are clearly blazing the trail of democracy for other Muslim nations to follow. The impending accession of Turkey into the European Union is also a clear statement of the level of liberal democracy attained though unfortunately the obstacles thrown in the way by some member countries is very telling of the state of Islamophobia. In Southeast Asia, Indonesia has already reached the finishing line while her Muslim neighbors are still stuck at the starting block. So history is indeed freedom if indeed we are prepared to learn its lessons.

Today, jihad has been invoked by certain quarters to legitimize acts of violence in varied forms and guises, blurring the line between jihad and terrorism. Thanks to the Obama administration, we have seen some palpable change from the Bush policy of selective ambivalence in the war on terror, supporting autocrats in the Muslim world on the one hand, and championing the cause of freedom and democracy on the other. Although after more than a year since the administration took office we have yet to see substantive changes in the substance of American foreign policy with the Muslim world.

Within Islam, freedom is considered one of the higher objectives of the divine law in as much as the very same elements in a constitutional democracy become moral imperatives in Islam – freedom of conscience, freedom to speak out against tyranny, a call for reform and the right to property.

In closing permit me once again to draw on my perpetual reserve in Eliot’s Four Quartets:

What we call the beginning is often the end
And to make and end is to make a beginning.
The end is where we start from.

Perlu Menegur DSAI February 19, 2009

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, Islam.
Tags: , , , , , ,
6 comments

Membaca tulisan DSAI akhir-akhir ini membuat IB memikir panjang. Dua posting yang amat mengganggu fikiran IB ialah berhubung perkembangan di Sri Lanka dan sambutan Thaipusam. Terganggunya fikiran IB kerana ketidak telitian DSAI dalam beberapa perkara yang ditulis dalam posting tersebut. Masa yang lama diambil untuk memikirkan bagaiman hendak diturun kata-kata ini.

Pertama, Kenyataan Media Berhubung Perkembangan Mutakhir di Sri Lanka, DSAI bimbang dengan “mangsa di kalangan rakyat, terutamanya penduduk Tamil di utara”. Mengapakah saudara tidak menyebut sama perihal umat Islam yang telah diusir oleh pengganas LTTE/Tamil Tigers? Ratusan ribu umat Islam telah dihalau dari kediaman mereka dan kini sudah bertahun merana terpaksa menjadi pelarian?

Tidak kurang pula mereka yang tidak bersalah dibunuh dengan kejam. Wanita dan kanak-kanak telah turut menjadi mangsa kekejaman pengganas LTTE. Perihal penderitaan ini MESTI disebut juga dalam menyatakan kebimbangan kumpulan minoriti orang-orang Tamil itu.

Kedua, ucapan Selamat Menyambut Hari Thaipusam. Seharusnya saudara amat faham sebagai orang Islam kita perlu menjaga pengucapan dan kata-kata kita agar tidak mencalar syahadah kita. Dalam mengEsakan Allah Azzawajala, kita tidak boleh menyekutukanNya. Tiada tuhan melainkan Allah.

Dari kata-kata dalam pengucapan tersebut saudara telah meletakkan pengiktirafan terhadap dewa-dewa Hindu tersebut. Teguran ikhlas ini adalah bagi mengingatkan DSAI untuk beristighfar dan supaya lebih teliti di masa-masa akan datang. Islam tidak melarang untuk memperjuangkan nasib penganut agama lain terutama mereka yang tertindas – malah adalah terkedepan dalam memperjuangkan keadilan, namun Islam turut mengariskan batas-batas syahadah kita.

Amantu billah.

Sekian, IB

Ex-cop: How AG interfered in ‘black eye’ case October 11, 2008

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, Kehakiman, Kerajaan, Ketelusan, Mahathir, politik.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

dipetik dari http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/91024


A retired senior police officer who probed the infamous ‘black eye’ incident involving Anwar Ibrahim in 1998 has made startling claims on how attorney-general (AG) Abdul Gani Patail allegedly tampered with evidence in the case

In a set of court documents revealed this week, Mat Zain Ibrahim implied that the actions of Abdul Gani, then a senior deputy public prosecutor, delayed the investigation process and concealed facts from then AG, the late Mohtar Abdullah.

Malaysiakini contacted Abdul Gani’s office for comments today, but has yet to receive a response to the voice-mail message.

Mat Zain, who had led the investigation team, made his revelations in a 18-page statement of claim in a RM30 million defamation suit that he filed against Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim on Aug 11, in the Shah Alam High Court. Mat Zain retired from the police force in 2001.

anwar ibrahim black eye 010805

He claimed he had been defamed in Anwar’s police report lodged on July 1 implying that he had fabricated evidence relating to the ‘black eye’ incident (left), in cooperation with Abdul Gani and inspector-general of police (IGP) Musa Hassan (while a senior investigation officer in 1998).

In his statement of claim, Mat Zain pleaded innocence to Anwar’s claims and instead pointed the finger at Abdul Gani by recounting how the latter had allegedly interfered in the case.

Mat Zain’s claims were first made public on Wednesday, during Anwar’s sodomy trial in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court. Anwar’s lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah had read out the document in court during submissions on why Abdul Gani should not be involved in any aspect of the sodomy case.

However, the media was told not to report the details pending the court’s decision on the admissibility of the evidence. The gag order was lifted yesterday.

rahim noor 01

According to the document, Mat Zain was instructed on Sept 27, 1998 by then IGP Abdul Rahim Mohd Noor (left) to head an investigation team, after Anwar lodged a report that day that he had been beaten up while in police custody, thereby sustaining injuries including a ‘black eye’.

Mat Zain said he had immediately instructed two forensic experts, Dr Halim Mansar and Dr Zahari Noor, from the Kuala Lumpur Hospital to examine Anwar.

Abdul Rahim met him privately that night and told him to conduct an in-depth investigation and “to leave no stone unturned” in order to uphold the image of the police force, he said in the document written in Bahasa Malaysia.

“I was ordered to only brief Rahim and (Mohtar) on the progress of the investigation and given the assurance that no other senior police officer will disrupt me in carrying out my duty.”

mahathir interview 050308A similar message was conveyed to Mat Zain in a meeting with then premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad (right) about two weeks later, to brief the latter on the progress of the investigation.

“During that meeting, I explained what actually happened to Anwar and identified the person who hurt him.

“The prime minister advised me that there should be no cover-up in the probe and stated that the government may set up an independent commission to investigate the case if there is any attempt to cover up the incident; (and if a commission had to be appointed) would tarnish not only the credibility of the police force but also mine,” the document added.

On Oct 16, 1998, Mat Zain said he met with Abdul Gani to hand over his first investigation report, after directed to liaise with him because Mokhtar was busy with official duties.

Gani’s role explained

Abdul Gani’s alleged interference came into the picture when Mat Zain alleged in his court document that:

– A questionable medical report was prepared by one Dr Abdul Rahman Yusof, allegedly on Abdul Gani’s order.

lingam tape panel meeting 031007 abdul gani patailMat Zain stated that he found out there was an attempt to “insert irrelevant and suspicious statements” into the investigation report, especially in relation to “Abdul Rahman’s report which was done on the instructions of Abdul Gani” (right). Mat Zain said he was confident that Abdul Rahman has never examined Anwar physically.

–  Mat Zain claimed he had obtained information that Abdul Gani was on the 30th floor of the federal police headquarters in Bukit Aman when Anwar was assaulted and he believed Abdul Gani knew of the incident either at the time or soon after.

– On Oct 30, 1998, Mat Zain personally handed over his second investigation paper and report to Abdul Gani, and briefed him on the details. Among the conclusions were that the Anwar’s injury was consistent with assault and not self-inflicted; and that Abdul Rahim was the person who caused the injury.

– Although two investigation reports had been given to Abdul Gani on Oct 26 and 30 respectively, Mohtar was quoted in the media on Nov 7 as saying that his chambers had not received any such report.

– It was only on Nov 20 that Mohtar reportedly said he had received the report. Mat Zain said he believed Mohtar’s statement was made after he (Mat Zain) had “pressured” Abdul Gani a day earlier to confirm the status of his two reports.

– On Nov 25, Musa informed Mat Zain that Mohtar wanted to meet him (Mat Zain) at Bukit Aman and to visit the lock-up where Anwar was held. Musa and Abdul Gani were present during the visit.

– Mat Zain later found out that Abdul Rahman’s second medical report had mentioned there was a visit to the lock-up (where Anwar was held) and a “reconstruction of the incidence”, where Mat Zain was named as the person who had accompanied Abdul Rahman to the

lock-up. Mat Zain denied this had ever taken place.

mohtar abdullah

– On Jan 6, 1999, Mohtar (left) had reportedly said Mat Zain’s investigations were incomplete and that the latter had yet to identify the perpetrator (despite the findings given to Abdul Gani on Oct 30, 1998).

– Mat Zain said he “believed Abdul Gani concealed important facts from Mohtar’s knowledge” and had personally appointed Abdul Rahman as the medical officer to prepare the report in October 1998. His conclusion was based on the fact that Mohtar had only appointed Abdul Rahman two months later.

– Mat Zain said Abdul Rahman later testified before the royal commission on the ‘black eye’ incident in March 1999 and gave conflicting statements with regard to his own findings. The proceedings came to an end when Abdul Rahim admitted that he had caused the injury to Anwar.

At the end of his court document, Mat Zain vehemently denied Anwar’s accusation that he had plotted any fabrication of evidence with Abdul Gani and Musa.

“The truth is I had acted to the best of my abilities to prevent any party from influencing me to do anything unlawful while investigating Anwar’s injury,” Mat Zain said.

Musa filed a defamation suit against Anwar on July 21 while Abdul Gani has threatened to do the same.

Tahiah Buat Anwar – Amanah Menanti August 27, 2008

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, politik.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

Tahniah buat Saudara Anwar Ibrahim yang baru memenangi kerusi P44 Permatang Pauh. Tahniah juga kepada seluruh jentera gandingan pelbagai parti dalam PR yang bekerja dengan penuh semangat dan tidak mengira penat lelah untuk memastikan Penasihat PKR melangkah masuk ke Parlimen.

Kini bermulalah bab baru dengan amanah yang dipikul oleh Anwar. Ingat akan janji-janji yang telah dibuat. Ingatlah amanah yang Allah Azzawajala telah tetapkan demi memelihara agama dan bangsa.

Ingatlah gema-gema yang kerap dilaungkan dahulu seperti:

“Islam itu tinggi, tiada yang lebih tinggi darinya”

Sekian, IB

Kenapa Hamid Albar Terketar-ketar? August 8, 2008

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, politik.
Tags: , , , , , ,
4 comments

Apabila kita menonton buletin TV3 malam tadi, ketika Syed Hamid Albar menjawab pertanyaan kenapa Anwar seorang sahaja yang didakwa sedang Saiful tidak, kita dapat lihat Hamid serba salah menjawabnya.

Kita dapat lihat dengan jelas pergerakan tangan dan badannya (body language) yang ketara gelisah. Ketika beliau hendak menolak cermin mata dengan jarinya, kita dapat lihat jarinya terketar-ketar. [Sila tonton video klip tersebut di laman TV3] Tonton bahagian pada minit 6:40 – perhatikan jari telunjuknya. Juga perhatikan gerak badannya yang amat tidak selesa sebelum .

Juga yang amat ketara bagi Hamid Albar ini ialah beliau tidak dapat bertutur/hujah dengan jelas. Kata-katanya banyak yang tersekat dan mencari-cari perkataan yang sesuai.

Apakah petanda ini semua? Adakah sesuatu yang beliau tahu dan ingin berselindung?

Anda tonton dan anda fikir.
Sekian, IB

Al Jazeera – Anwar arrested on sex charges July 16, 2008

Posted by ibrahimbaba in Anwar, politik.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

Dipetik dari Al Jazeera

Malaysian police have arrested Anwar Ibrahim, the de facto opposition leader, less than an hour before a deadline for him to appear at police headquarters to answer allegations of sexual assault.

About a dozen policemen, some wearing balaclavas, cordoned off the road leading to Anwar’s house in Kuala Lumpur, stopped his car and then took him to police headquarters, Anwar’s lawyer said.

Police moved in to arrest Anwar early on Wednesday afternoon as he was returning home from the Anti-Corruption Agency office in Putrajaya, the country’s administrative capital.

A former male aide has accused Anwar of sodomising him –  a criminal offence in Malaysia which carries a sentence of up to 20 years in jail.

No reason was given for the police move, which came ahead of a deadline of 2pm on Wednesday for Anwar to voluntarily submit himself for questioning over the allegations.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Syed Hamid Albar, Malaysia’s home affairs minister, said Anwar had “been arrested according to due process” and was not being treated differently from any other suspect.

“Now it’s up to the police and the prosecution side to decide the next course of action,” he said.

Anwar’s arrest is expected to deepen political divisions and tensions that have been running high in Malaysia since the governing coalition lost its parliamentary majority in the March general elections.

‘Not gentle’

Opposition legislators including Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Anwar’s wife and leader of the opposition Keadilan party, had gathered outside police headquarters in anticipation of his arrest.

Wan Azizah said her husband, who is officially an advisor to Keadilan, called on her mobile phone shortly after being arrested.

“I feel apprehensive because my husband… is not that well,” she said.

“He has a bad back, he’s had surgery. And [during] the brief conversation he said they [the police] were not gentle.”

Earlier on Wednesday Anwar gave a statement to the corruption watchdog over reports he had lodged against the national police chief and the attorney-general.

“There is no basis for this whole fabrication and malicious attacks,” he said. “It is just a repeat of the 1998 script. You can see the pattern.”

Corruption complaint

Anwar claims the police chief and attorney-general had fabricated evidence in the investigation into his police detention in 1999, during which he was allegedly beaten up.

Speaking to reporters in Putrajaya before his arrest he said planned to give his “fullest cooperation” to police and would deliver himself voluntarily to police headquarters at the 2pm deadline.

Azmin Ali, vice-president of Keadilan, said the arrest was “certainly outrageous and very uncivilised” especially after Anwar had made an appointment with the police.

“This is not a criminal case but a political case,” he added.

In 1998 Anwar faced similar charges when he was accused of sodomising a male assistant.

The accusation led to his sacking from government posts of finance minister and deputy prime minister and an eventual jail sentence.

His conviction on sodomy charges was later overturned by Malaysia’s high court, but a related corruption conviction remains.

Anwar’s downfall sparked massive street protests for several weeks