|
|||||||||||||||
|
THINKING ALLOWED
No deal between Pak Lah and Anwar Aliran Monthly 2004:8
Please support our work by buying a copy of our print publication, Aliran Monthly, from your nearest news-stand. Better still take out a subscription now. If you prefer to read our web-based edition, please support our work and make a donation. For a US$10 donation (via credit card) 
For a US$25 donation
Of course no deal was made between Pak Lah and Anwar prior to the Federal Court�s decision to overturn the decision of its own High Court which resulted in the release of Anwar. No, Pak Lah did not disguise himself to visit Mr X in his Sg Buloh cell in the middle of the night. Nor did he send any emissary. His son-in-law Khairy only met Anwar after he had been released, and that was because of difficulties Anwar faced in getting a passport. For some who maintain that there was a Pak Lah-Anwar deal, this Khairy episode is simply a red herring. We disagree. We believe both Pak Lah and Anwar when they denied any deal-making. Their integrities are intact. But since when do deals need to be made in a four-eyed meeting between two protagonists? Here, we wish to share with you some rumours that have come our way. However, in the spirit of responsible reporting of rumours you should be forewarned that you should not be taking rumours seriously, even if evidence is provided to support them. OK? The gist of the rumours is that �the deal� involved someone �high-up in the judiciary� with someone �high-up in the executive� � rumours are like this, they cannot be too specific. Two sets of �evidence� � the term is used loosely here � are cited. First, while the rest of the country did not even remember that the decision on Anwar�s appeal was coming up on 2 Sept, let alone which level of the Court was going to hear him out, not least because of the numerous appeals that Anwar had made, the legal fraternity in Kuala Lumpur was passing rumours to one another about Anwar�s pending release. And this was almost two weeks prior to the Federal Court�s decision! Apparently, lawyers-in-the-know were also passing around rumours that the decision would not be unanimous, and some rumours even specified who among the three judges would dissent. There were also rumours of who was looking jolly, and who was looking glum for two weeks while in and out of Court. No, no, we�re not talking of the Tun who did look very glum on TV on the night of 2 Sept; that was after Anwar�s release. The second piece of evidence pointing to �a deal� is that more senior Federal Court judges were not sitting on the case. Instead, two of the three sitting judges were relatively junior � one was elevated not so long ago while another was actually a member of the Appeals Court who had been appointed to hear this specific case. The suggestion here is that the junior judges could be more easily persuaded to accept the terms and go along with any deal being made. But such an argument is flawed - for we know juniors can in fact be tougher than seniors. At any rate, not even for a moment, should we entertain rumours, without any hard evidence, that our judges are anything other than learned and fair. Returning to �the deal� it is not clear that the two sets of evidence mentioned are adequate to sustain the argument that a deal between higher-ups was made? A court of law would probably rule such evidence as �hearsay� and throw out the case. Besides, isn�t it odd that a deal was now being made, not to keep in Anwar, but to release him! In rebuttal, the rumour-mongers point to how the KLSE surged and ended on a high note that very day Anwar was released. And for even more speculative rumour-mongering, it is said that Anwar�s release was to signal to the international business and financial circles that they ought to return to Malaysia again, now that the integrity of the judiciary has been restored. Any return to the bullish days of the early 1990s is dependent on not only transparent corporate governance but also the rule of law and an independent judiciary. And finally, there is the mother-of-all-rumours � not the one that the Malaysian government is virtually bankrupt, which should not be taken seriously whatsoever, but - that the government seriously needs foreign partners, or an injection of foreign funds and investments in order to jump-start the economy again. Not necessarily so, the government-types would respond for we still have �strong fundamentals� and our growth rates are on the way up again. Is this fact, or simply a rumour? Merdeka It is perhaps ironic that Anwar�s release came so soon after this year�s Merdeka celebrations which was held in Kuantan. His sacking from the Cabinet and expulsion from UMNO had occurred very shortly after the 1998 Merdeka celebrations, in fact on 2 Sept 1998, exactly six years earlier. On that occasion, remember, Anwar had stood next to Mahathir on a make-shift dais set up in front of Universiti Sains Malaysia in Penang, Despite Anwar professing his loyalty to Dr M at that time, he was soon ousted, arrested, tried and incarcerated. There is that classic picture of the two of them on the dais both forcing a smile. Those in the know, apparently, saw daggers in their eyes, and high-wire tension in that small gap between the two. Things were rather different in Kuantan this time. Pak Lah was on the dais taking his first Merdeka celebrations salute. Between him and his deputy, there seemed to be good vibes. Pak Lah came across as warm and dignified but his deputy was a little too much rah-rah-rah. Kemerdekaan cuma bererti jika kita kibarkan jalur gemilang dengan cara masing-masing (Independence only has meaning if we fly the Malaysian flag), he had proclaimed over the TV. And so we had the kacang (peanut) vendors putting together a flag made of kacang in national colours. This jalur gemilang was edible! There was also a bullock cart with both the bull and the cart decked in national colours. It was nice to hear parents reminiscing to their young ones about how we travelled and transported goods in the pre-Proton and pre-Kancil days. There was also, in Penang, an effort by the Muslim Youths to (re)paint the longest jalur gemilang (Malaysian flag) on the side of an elevated road in Tg Bungah. It got them into the Malaysian Book of Records. But the effort is so unimaginative. Our RTM team who went to Athens had also hoped to televise home scenes of the jalur gemilang flying during a few prize-giving ceremonies. That didn�t happen because our Olympians, except for two, just weren�t quite world-class despite all the fuss and the hype at home prior to their departure. The two most impressive of our Olympians were cyclist Josiah Ng who despite problems with his coaches ended up a very credible fifth in the kierin (now you know what this event is all about), and brave 14-year-old Bryan Nickson who competed in diving and appeared unfazed by all. The jalur gemilang didn�t fly for either of them but they made us proud with their fighting spirit. Indeed, Brian, as the youngest competitor in Athens, touched the hearts of many non-Malaysians as well, and even appeared in the front pages of foreign dailies like in the 28 August issue of Canada�s National Post. The DPM is wrong. It�s not about flag-waving really. It�s not even about winning and flying the flag in competitions. It�s about giving your very best in spite of the odds. Otherwise, this reckless driver who flies two jalur gemilang on his Proton and almost crashed into other cars as he raced down Penang�s crowded streets would be among the most patriotic Malaysians. The fable of the ass An English judge once proclaimed: �The law is an ass!� He probably meant the law was too slow or too stubbornly resistant to change. Forget the ass which can�t press for slander. Bluntly, does that mean that someone must �kick ass� to get the law moving? If so, here�s a clue as to who gets the job. When passing judgement in that famous case, Lim Kit Siang v. United Engineers (M) Sdn Bhd and 3 Ors. (No.2) (1988) 1 MLJ 50, Eusoffe Abdoolcader SCJ said: Even if the law�s pace may be slower than society�s march, what with increased and increasing civic-consciousness and appreciation of rights and fundamental values in the citizenry, it must nevertheless strive to be relevant if it is to perform its function of peaceful ordering of the relations between and among persons in society, and between and among persons and government at various levels. Six years ago, �society�s march�, as the late Abdoolcader had described it, was obvious: Reformasi, Justice, Democracy, Undur Mahathir, Free Anwar! In front of the marchers were the �Red Helmets� armed with tear gas, rotan and water cannon. Behind the marchers was the law � its police enforcers, public prosecutors and learned judges, meting out arrests, fines and prison terms for illegal assembly, sedition, and threats to national security. Did the law �strive to be relevant� then? Or did �law�s pace�, like a laggard�s in a marathon race, stay irrelevantly behind �society�s march�? Rewind to 1998�99 � the Court of Public Opinion reached its verdict on Anwar: Innocent though imprisoned. Fast forward to 2 September 2004 � the Federal Court offered a U-turn decision: Acquitted but guilty. Is this the way the law makes an ass of itself by taking one small step forward? And in the process by forcing society to take two big steps back? Because this is how the Barisan Nasional politicians are playing the �freed Anwar� game:
But no disclosure of the UMNO and BN leadership�s complicity and opportunism? All kinds of asses and their drivers tried to obstruct �society�s march� for Anwar�s freedom. The true heroes are:
Waging for justice in Malaysia Ever since the infamous dismissal of former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim and the emergence of the reformasi movement in 1998, justice has become all the more urgent and relevant to ordinary Malaysians. Justice has indeed become a buzzword, a household word in a society that has witnessed a stained mattress being carried to and from the High Court in Kuala Lumpur. And the impact of this episode is still felt to this day. A few weeks ago, Anwar�s appeal against his sodomy conviction eventually attained success and justice prevailed. And this occurred at an august place in Putrajaya called the Palace of Justice. We understand that the period that followed Anwar�s sacking and humiliation was so pregnant with everything and anything to do with justice (also known as keadilan in Malay) that the powers-that-be simply refused to translate the name of the court into the Malay language, i.e. Istana Keadilan, for fear that it would remind Malaysians of the Keadilan political party that Anwar is associated with. One would assume that something would be lost in translation. Talking of Anwar�s appeal against his sodomy conviction reminds us of the behaviour, or rather the misdemeanour, of most of Malaysia�s mainstream media. The moment the result of Anwar�s appeal broke out, the media went into a frenzy, falling over each other to record the momentous event as if they had for the first time stumbled on this character called Anwar. They behaved as if they had forgotten the way they had alienated Anwar like the plague for the past six years while he served his prison sentence. It is as if the media exercised selective amnesia. Such is the behaviour of the shameless Malaysian mainstream media. Are justice and fair play the primary concerns of the mainstream media when it comes to media coverage? Of course not. We suspect the only time mainstream media editors and journalists would clamour for justice is when their bonuses and other perks are threatened by their employers. In other words , the concern for justice becomes terribly personal and selfish. Malaysia Boleh! Now e-mail us and tell us what you think. Your comments might be published in the Letters section of our print magazine, Aliran Monthly. | |||||||||||||||
We believe both Pak Lah and Anwar when they denied any deal-making. Their integrities are intact 
