|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Asia
: Malaysia
A highly political decision
Malaysian judge directs Anwar to answer charges
By John Roberts and Peter Symonds
3 February 1999
The trial of Malaysia's former deputy prime minister Anwar
Ibrahim has entered a new stage. The presiding judge Augustine
Paul last Saturday rejected defence arguments calling for the
dismissal of the charges and ruled that the prosecution had established
a prima facie case. The trial is due to resume on February 8 when
the opposition will begin to call its own witnesses, the first
being Anwar himself.
Paul's decision to proceed with the case despite the flimsy
character of the prosecution evidence confirms the political character
of the trial and the crisis surrounding it. Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad and his supporters cannot afford to have the charges dropped,
leaving his former deputy free to mount a political campaign.
Yet the further the trial proceeds the more it opens up rifts
in the ruling coalition, generates conflicts in Mahathir's United
Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and fuels anti-government
sentiment and protests.
The weakness of the prosecution case was sharply revealed in
the decision of the government lawyers to seek a modification
of the charges--after they had presented all their witnesses.
The original charges alleged that Anwar had abused his position
by directing Special Branch police to force two individuals to
retract their written accusations of sexual misconduct against
him.
In the course of cross-examination, defence lawyers began to
expose the bogus nature of the allegations of sexual misconduct,
discredit key prosecution witnesses and raise doubts about the
physical evidence. They also began to reveal the connections between
those making the allegations and Mahathir and his key supporters,
including Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin and Domestic Trade Minister
Megat Junid.
Having provided the Malaysian press for weeks with lurid accounts
of Anwar's alleged misconduct, the prosecution lawyers then called
for the charges to be changed so that they no longer had to prove
whether the statements made against Anwar were true or not. Judge
Paul not only rubberstamped this extraordinary procedure and expunged
the evidence from the court records but has now ruled that Anwar
has a case to answer. The withdrawal of the key evidence has undermined
the credibility of the entire prosecution case, yet it is to proceed.
It is worth considering just what this prima facie case hinges
upon. If the prosecution can no longer prove that the original
accusations were true, then Anwar's alleged motivation for approaching
the police in the first place is completely altered. The prosecution
now alleges that Anwar was simply trying to avoid embarrassment.
Its case rests even more heavily on the evidence of the former
Special Branch chief Mohamad Said Awang who claims that Anwar
told him to obtain retractions from the two accusers.
Said created an uproar in the first week of the trial by admitting,
under cross-examination, that he would lie under oath in court
if ordered to do so by "someone higher than the deputy prime
minister". He and other Special Branch officers explained
to the court in graphic detail the methods used in their "turning-over
operations" used to pressure individuals to change their
evidence and stated political beliefs.
In other words, in the murky world of the Malaysian Special
Branch, "truth" is determined by interrogation and torture
according to the requirements of the government of the day. It
is on the evidence of such police that the prosecution is relying
to prove its case.
A second question also emerges. As the defence pointed out
in its summing up, Anwar is alleged to have used his influence
with the Special Branch police but he was certainly not the responsible
minister. It is hardly conceivable that Said, a man used to working
within the world of political intrigue, took any action on his
own responsibility without first discussing the matter with his
police chief and the Home Affairs Minister--a position held in
this case by Mahathir himself.
Yet no-one has raised the necessity of indicting Mahathir,
other members of the cabinet or the former police chief for aiding
and abetting Anwar's alleged corruption. Nor, more importantly,
has anyone, including Anwar and his supporters, called for the
abolition of the entire apparatus of police state repression which
has been a crucial prop of the ruling UMNO regime for more than
four decades.
What becomes clearer and clearer as the trial proceeds is that
the split between Anwar and Mahathir is a sordid political brawl
within Malaysian ruling circles over the direction of economic
policy. It has nothing to do with corruption and sexual misconduct,
as Mahathir maintains. Nor is it about "democracy,"
as Anwar claims.
Furthermore there is every indication that the political crisis
will deepen as the trial continues. Firstly, the defence lawyers
have indicated that they may call Mahathir to the stand as well
as other figures closely associated with the political decision
to prosecute Anwar: Daim Zainuddin, Megat Junid and former Inspector
General of Police Abdul Rahim Noor.
Secondly, following the amendments to the charges, Anwar has
now launched legal action suing Mahathir, the local Sun
newspaper, the US magazine Newsweek and CNN over their
statements and accounts concerning his alleged sexual misconduct.
Thirdly, Mahathir has been forced to announce an inquiry into
the police beating received by Anwar when he was taken into custody.
When Anwar first appeared in court with a black eye and said he
had been severely beaten, Mahathir claimed the injuries were self-inflicted.
But sharp opposition, including within the ruling coalition, forced
the government to admit the police had caused the wounds, to sack
the police chief and now to initiate a further inquiry.
At the same time, anti-government protests are continuing.
Last Saturday at least 500 people demonstrated outside the courtroom,
chanting "Reformisi"--the chant of Anwar's supporters.
The demonstration broke up after riot police ordered it to disperse.
Many onlookers watched a further protest in the city centre calling
for Mahathir's resignation. The same demand was repeated at a
rally at a suburban mosque. Mahathir, who was at the World Economic
Forum in Davos, Switzerland, attacked the organisers and said
the government would suppress further pro-Anwar rallies.
See Also:
A travesty of justice: Malaysian
judge amends charges in Anwar's trial
[16 January 1999]
What Anwar
Ibrahim means by "reformasi" in Malaysia
[26 November 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |