Search box

Brutal murder of a Mongolian beauty

Search This Blog

Friday, May 29, 2009

What AI says about RPK.

Freedom of expression: Authorities suspended or threatened to cancel publishing permits under the PPPA, and arrested bloggers under the Sedition Act.
  • In May, blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin was charged under the Sedition Act for an article in which he allegedly implied the involvement of the Deputy Prime Minister in the murder of a Mongolian woman. In September, he was arbitrarily arrested and detained under the ISA. Six days before his arrest, the Home Minister was quoted as saying that he could be arrested under the ISA for insulting Muslims and degrading Islam in articles that appeared on his website. The Home Minister issued a two-year detention order, which is renewable indefinitely. In November, after much public discussion, the High Court ruled that he be released.[more]

Shafee Abdullah: caught with his pants down

On 6 August 2008, I wrote an article called ‘Shafee Abdullah: sodomologist extraordinaire’. Shafee has since sued me for this article and in his summons-in-chamber he says that my allegation does not contain any particulars. Well, today, I will certainly give him those particulars that he seeks.

Friday, 29 May 2009 | THE CORRIDORS OF POWER | Raja Petra Kamarudin

It was a few days before that article that I received the phone call from Tamrin Ghafar. Tamrin said someone wants to meet me and it was very urgent and extremely important that I meet this person. It was agreed that we meet for tea at the Havana Club in the One World Hotel in Damansara Utama.

My wife and I arrived there early but did not have to wait too long. Within minutes Tamrin walked in with Datuk Kamal Amir and Datuk Kadar Shah. It was actually Datuk Kadar who wanted to see me although Tamrin did not mention that earlier when he phoned me -- and I knew better than to ask over the phone considering the police were monitoring my phone calls.

Datuk Kadar related how he had gone to lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s office a few days earlier to discuss Jamaluddin Jarjis’s bottom pinching case in the Havana Club at KL Sentral. I think Datuk Kadar was involved because he had an interest in the establishment. Anyway, I was told Shafee wanted JJ to pay RM1 million as ‘settlement’ or else his scandal was going to explode.

And this was when Datuk Kadar saw that whiteboard with Anwar Ibrahim’s and my name on it and the police officers who were in the office discussing the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy II case. And a few days later the whole sodomy thing exploded with Saiful’s ‘revelation’ that he had been sodomised, the PUSRAWI doctor’s examination that showed Saiful was still a virgin, and Najib’s denial and later his admission that he had met Saiful prior to the sodomy allegation.

The rest I had already written about in August 2008, which you can read below in case you have not read it yet. I have since been sued and the case is still pending. And Datuk Kadar said he will come forward to testify if need be that he did see what he told me he saw in Shafee’s office that day, and which I wrote about on 6 August 2008. Shafee, of course, denies this and that is why he sued me.


Very troubling reports have been published, which reveal the existence of a medical report of an examination done by a doctor on Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan a few hours before Saiful lodged a police report that he had been sodomised. The medical report apparently shows that there is no evidence that he had been sodomised by anyone.

Such reports raise some very serious questions that require immediate answers:

(1) Are the police in possession of such a medical report?

(2) Was the doctor concerned interviewed by the police and was he detained for any length of time?

(3) Is the doctor concerned facing any form of intimidation and, if so, by whom?

(4) Is there a medical report by another doctor that either confirms or contradicts the first medical report?

(5) If it is true that the medical report exists showing a lack of prima facie evidence, what then could have been the justification for the vigorous actions taken against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as well as the public call by the authorities for his DNA sample?

The answers to these questions are of paramount importance, as they bring into focus the integrity of our law enforcement system.

These latest disclosures regarding the investigations into the sodomy allegations are not the only ones to raise questions that need answering. There is, for example, also the issue of P. Balasubramaniam's abrupt "disappearance" that has yet to be satisfactorily explained. No one can deny that the circumstances of his first and second statutory declarations are highly unusual. All these show a pattern of events that cause much disquiet to right-thinking members of the public.

The Malaysian people are deeply troubled. A country that truly believes in the rule of law should not be faced with so many disturbing developments and unanswered questions.

The credibility of the Malaysian justice system as a whole is therefore at stake. The integrity of professionals, be they doctors or lawyers, must never be interfered with. The public must be left in no doubt that the criminal justice system in this country will not be misused or abused. There must be nothing less than an open and thorough investigation into these cases. This calls for the courage and professionalism of all those involved to do the right thing no matter the consequences. And those who have shown such courage and integrity must know that they live in a country where it is safe to do so.

Dato' Ambiga Sreenevasan
Malaysian Bar


What Ambiga said in her press statement above is certainly true and she has cause for concern. But she would be even more concerned if she knows what we know about this whole matter.

A special police operations centre was set up some time ago to coordinate all activities related to the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy crisis. No, the special police operations centre was not set up AFTER the alleged sodomy act took place on 26 June 2008. It was set up way before 26 June 2008.

Why the need to set up a special police operations centre BEFORE the date of the alleged sodomy act? Are they clairvoyant and did they peep into their crystal ball and ‘see’ the crime happen before it actually happened? Was the special police operations centre set up so that they could solve the crime? Or was the special police operations centre set up BEFORE the date of the ‘crime’ so that they could invent the so-called crime?

Yes, questions and yet more questions. But this is not yet the icing on the cake. The icing on the cake is that this special police operations centre is not located in the police headquarters. It is located in the meeting room of the office of prominent Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah who possesses a notorious reputation for fixing cases such as those involving the people implicated in murdering Altantuya Shaariibuu or those alleged to have pinched the bottoms of cigar girls in the Havana Club in Kuala Lumpur.

Name me any questionable case and you will find the hand of Shafee Abdullah behind that case. And this same person is coordinating the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy allegation from the meeting room of his law office in Kenny Hills.

There are four police officers headed by an officer name Aziz who are based in this special police operations centre in the meeting room of Shafee Abdullah’s law firm. But why are they based in an Umno lawyer’s office instead of in the police headquarters? Is this an official police operation or is this a rogue operation? Yes, we have watched many Hollywood movies about the CIA’s Dirty Tricks Department. Have Shafee Abdullah and the Royal Malaysian Police also seen the same movie? It appears so because the special police operations centre in Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm looks like a plot out of these movies.

In this special police operations centre in Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm is a whiteboard and on this whiteboard are two names: Anwar Ibrahim and Raja Petra Kamarudin. Below these two names are all sorts of notes, scribblings and etchings. There are also charts and strategies on how both Anwar Ibrahim and Raja Petra Kamarudin can be implicated in various crimes and incarcerated until their teeth fall out of their gums.

Yes, the police report to Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah. And Shafee Abdullah coordinates this special police operation with the IGP and AG. And the purpose of this special police operations centre in the meeting room of Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm is to explore how to incarcerate Anwar Ibrahim and Raja Petra Kamarudin. And the special police operations centre has to be in Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s office and not in the police headquarters because, officially, the IGP and AG are not involved in the Anwar sodomy case, as announced by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Shafee Abdullah is no ordinary man. In fact, he is not even a man; he is a devil. But he is Malaysia’s first and foremost sodomologist, a specialist in crimes of sodomy. And that is why the Pusrawi doctor’s report was rejected. He is just a normal doctor, a GP, argued the government. The prognosis of a normal doctor can’t be accepted as evidence in a sodomy case, never mind if he has been practicing medicine for two decades or more. They need the prognosis of a sodomy specialist, a sodomologist, and Shafee Abdullah is Malaysia’s first and foremost sodomologist.

That is why Senior Assistant Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof did not meet Saiful in the police station or at the police headquarters. The special police operations centre is not in the police station or at the police headquarters. It is in the meeting room of Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm. So it would be dangerous to meet Saiful in this law firm lest someone finds out. That is why Rodwan met Saiful in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel.

Okay, so Rodwan met Saiful one day before the alleged crime took place. But then maybe Rodwan is clairvoyant or he has a crystal ball and he ‘saw’ that a crime of sodomy was going to take place the following day. Some people do have this gift of ‘foresight’. Nevertheless, whether the timeline appears a bit out of sync or not, they still have the ‘evidence’ to work on to ‘prove’ that Anwar did sodomise Saiful the day AFTER Saiful met Rodwan in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel.

One such crucial evidence was supposed to be the doctor from Pusrawi’s medical examination of Saiful at 2.00pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. But then the doctor said that he had examined Saiful and found no evidence of sodomy. This report has since surfaced and the doctor has gone missing so, now, there is no way they can use this evidence.

The next evidence was supposed to be the second medical examination done at the Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) at 4.00pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. But then the outpatient department of the HKL was closed at 4.00pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. So how could a second medical examination have been done? Yes, that’s right. No second medical examination was done and the doctors at the HKL refuse to doctor a medical report to say that the second medical examination had been done, when none had been done, or to say that they did find evidence of sodomy, when they did not.

Since none of the doctors at Pusrawi or HKL are cooperating with the police, the last piece of ‘evidence’ will have to be Saiful’s underwear. Okay, Saiful’s underwear does not really have Anwar’s semen stains on it. But this is a small matter. As long as someone from the Chemistry Department is prepared to testify that they did examine Saiful’s underwear and they did find Anwar’s semen stains on it, then that would be good enough. They will be able to build their case against Anwar and charge him for sodomy based on this ‘evidence’ from the Chemistry Department.

No, the Chemistry Department has NOT come out with their report yet. There is no report from the Chemistry Department that says they found Anwar’s semen stains on Saiful’s underwear. This is because they first of all need Anwar’s specimen so that they can plant it on the underwear and so that the Chemistry Department can then ‘discover’ it.

But Anwar is being bloody silly. He is being extremely pigheaded and stubborn. He refuses to hand over his specimen. How can they plant Anwar’s semen on Saiful’s underwear when Anwar refuses to let them take his specimen? The Chemistry Department can’t prepare its report saying that it found Anwar’s semen on Saiful’s underwear until the police are able to plant it there. But Anwar does not want to voluntarily hand over his specimen so this plan is being upset a bit.

But never mind. As soon as Parliament convenes later this month they will rush through a new law that will make it mandatory for you to hand over your specimen if the police demands that you do so. Refusing to hand over your specimen when the police demand that you do so will soon become a crime and you can be sent to jail. They will try to pass this law before Merdeka Day of 31 August 2008 and they will try to backdate the law and make it retrospective so that any ‘crime’ committed before the passing of this law will also be covered.

Soon they will get Anwar once the DNA Act becomes law and Anwar can no longer refuse to hand over his specimen. Then, once they have obtained Anwar’s specimen, the Chemistry Department will be able to ‘discover’ it on Saiful’s underwear. Then they will be able to arrest and charge Anwar. And, who knows, they might even be able to convict him as well.

Yes, this Shafee Abdullah the sodomologist is good. He has names, charts, notes, scribbling and etchings all over his whiteboard in the meeting room of his law firm. This meeting room has been the special police operations centre for quite a while now. It was set up long before the alleged sodomy crime took place on 26 June 2008. It was set up not to solve the sodomy crime. It was set up to create the crime.

But, thus far, they lack one very crucial piece of evidence. They lack Anwar’s specimen that they need to plant on Saiful’s underwear. But they will get it as soon as the new DNA Act becomes law and they can use this law to force Anwar to hand over his specimen. Then Anwar is finished and they can close down the special police operations centre in the meeting room of Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm and once again use this meeting room for fixing legal cases.


Lawyer: Abdul Razak Baginda 'is completely unimplicated'

Abdul Razak Baginda, a prominent political analyst, knew the murdered Mongolian model. His lawyer, Shafee Abdullah, said he wouldn't "go so far to say" that Abdul Razak had a relationship with Altantuya Shaariibuu, but would say that "he knows the lady."

He said he met his client Wednesday morning and heard his side of the story. "I am extremely relieved from my conversation ... I am totally convinced of his innocence .. he is completely unimplicated." [Associated Press via International Herald Tribune]


Anwar verdict puts Malaysia's justice system on trial
Report by Tim Lester
ABC Online; 14 April 1999

MAXINE MCKEW: Well, to our own region now and the most publicised trial in Malaysia's history ended today, with Anwar Ibrahim — the man once groomed to lead the nation — jailed for six years, after a judge found him guilty on four counts of corruption.

Asian leaders have joined human rights groups in denouncing the severity of the sentence. In Malaysia, there have been clashes between police and protesters in the wake of the judgment, suggesting widespread scepticism with the verdict. So, did the system succeed in catching a wayward politician, or did it dance to the tune of an opportunistic leader who wants a political enemy behind bars?

TIM LESTER: Conviction day for Anwar Ibrahim.

As his supporters took to the streets around Kuala Lumpur's High Court, few doubted the outcome of the marathon corruption trial. For seven months now, they've watched Anwar battle to keep alive his shot at the country's top job.

They've heard him say repeatedly the system was being used against him. Many Malaysians, perhaps most, believe it. They believe Anwar Ibrahim's conviction was orchestrated to suit the PM and several of his close colleagues.

BRUCE GALE: There is a feeling among a large number of Malaysians that the trial wasn't fair.

TIM LESTER: Singapore analyst Bruce Gale sees this perception — whether right or wrong — as a problem for the Mahathir Government.

BRUCE GALE: If you have large sections of the population believing that somehow the judiciary is not fair or impartial, then this is a very serious situation. It's an undermining of a major national institution.

GURBACHAN SINGH: We could have easily shown by irrefutable evidence the involvement of several top politicians to bring Anwar Ibrahim down politically.

TIM LESTER: Among Anwar's nine defence lawyers, there is deep frustration that many witnesses, documents, even tapes they had ready didn't make it to evidence, because the judge wouldn't allow them.

GURBACHAN SINGH: There was evidence of the involvement of the PM, as well, that he knew this process of political conspiracy was going on — he did nothing to stop it.

MAHATHIR MOHAMAD: I wish he hadn't done this and he should have succeeded me and everything would be fine.

TIM LESTER: Political conspiracy — it was Anwar's claim the moment Dr Mahathir dumped him as Deputy PM and his lawyers say it was vital to their defence of the four corruption charges. But Judge Augustine Paul ruled as irrelevant the suggestion that government ministers and officials cooked up the sex claims to ruin Anwar.

GURBACHAN SINGH: Most of the rulings where the judge could exercise discretion, went against us.

MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH: When the trial first started, I think at least for the first two months or three, there were often times, I thought, where the judge was giving a lot of leeway to the defence.

TIM LESTER: Former prosecutor Shafee Abdullah praises Judge Paul for refusing to hear Anwar's conspiracy argument in relation to the four corruption charges.

MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH: Whether or not he committed those sexual offences have got nothing to do with the present charges.

TIM LESTER: So was Anwar's trial fair?

Yes, says Shafee Abdullah. But even he admits Malaysians don't see it that way.

MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH: There are a lot of individuals out there who feel that the whole trial has gone completely bonkers. Many individuals think that Anwar did not receive a fair trial.

TIM LESTER: The damage from the trial goes beyond perceptions about Government influence over the judiciary to the police force.

MUHAMED AZMIN ALI: They hit me physically and they stripped me naked and asked me to dance in the room, with my hand handcuffed.

TIM LESTER: Anwar Ibrahim's private secretary of 11 years was among hundreds arrested at the height of anti-government protests last year. He's now making a disturbingly common claim in Kuala Lumpur — that police used brutality and humiliation in the hope of recruiting him as a witness against Anwar.

MUHAMED AZMIN ALI: Oh, yeah, they asked me to admit that I was sodomised by Anwar.

TIM LESTER: Three of five people cited in sex charges pending against Anwar have now withdrawn their claims and turned on police.

GURBACHAN SINGH: And they were picked up and forced — tortured by the police — to make allegations against Anwar, to admit to sodomy, which they repeatedly said never happened. And they've gone on affidavits, they've gone on statutory declarations to that effect.

TIM LESTER: Add in Anwar's black eye — Malaysia's highest-ranking officer at the time hit him while he was blindfolded and handcuffed. In the process of convicting Anwar, Malaysia's police have earned themselves an image crisis.

Among other claims that didn't make it to court — the Washington limousine driver who says a Malaysian embassy official asked him to accuse Anwar of sexual misconduct while visiting the US.

JAMAL AMRO: Then he asked me — he said "Relax". Then he told me, "Anwar — did you ever bring girls for him, or boys or anything like that?"

I said, "No".

He said "C'mon, if you say 'Yes', we can make some money".

TIM LESTER: Jamal says he was told he could make more than $250,000 by going along with the sex claims against the then Deputy PM. Public anger over Anwar's treatment has helped his wife, Wan Azizah, win backing for a new political party and an opposition alliance to fight Dr Mahathir at the next election.

MUHAMED AZMIN ALI: The hatred against the present leadership is swelling because they can not believe the manner they handled this issue against Anwar.

TIM LESTER: This trial and the events around it have thrown up challenges the Mahathir Government didn't anticipate. Now, there's the possibility of a united opposition at the next national election due within 12 months.

A powerful threat for Dr Mahathir, but it's still not likely. The groups Anwar's supporters need to bring together would make unusual partners.

BRUCE GALE: It seems extremely difficult for me to believe that post-election, that this alliance could hold. The policies of these parties are so diametrically opposed to one another. Islamic fundamentalists want an Islamic State. To the Chinese, this is an anathema — something they would never accept.

TIM LESTER: Many Malaysians don't like the way their government and judicial system dealt with Anwar Ibrahim. Today's verdict will only fuel their suspicions.

But Dr Mahathir is still in the middle ground of Malaysian politics. His enemies have a giant task — trying to bring together opposition parties into an alliance needed to capitalise on anti-government sentiment.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

A prelude to Anwar Ibrahim’s ‘Sodomy II’ trial

Now, the day after Saiful met Najib, he met Rodwan in room 619 of the Kuala Lumpur Concorde. Najib did not know this of course. Prior to that meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke over the phone at least eight times.

Thursday, 28 May 2009 | THE CORRIDORS OF POWER | Raja Petra Kamarudin

On 11 August 2008, in an article called ‘The real dalang behind the Anwar sodomy allegation’, Malaysia Today wrote: Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General.

Since the publishing of article almost a year ago, Shafee has sued me and in his summons in chambers he applied to strike off my defence on grounds that my allegation did not have any particulars. Well, if it’s particulars he wants then it is particulars he shall get.

In the meantime, read what Malaysia Today wrote on 11 August 2008:

Sodomy II: Who stands to gain the most?

In the court of the rakyat, Anwar Ibrahim is not guilty of Sodomy II, and neither was he guilty of Sodomy I. He was initially found guilty of Sodomy I (that ‘judgment’ later reversed) in the most convoluted and illogical judicial process facilitated and engineered by top policemen, prosecutors and judges who were anything but the respected and responsible public servants for law and order and justice in a democratic country.

Today, we are on the verge of witnessing a repeat of that most shameful process in Malaysia's history. The question is why would anyone want to do this? Surely, Saiful (aged 13 during Sodomy I) knows the gravity, implications and consequences of his allegations against Anwar.

Assuming that Saiful has actually been sodomised, what does he gain by lodging a report? He says that he been sodomised eight times by Anwar, in which case he should have lodged a police report immediately after the first incident if he were the innocent law-abiding citizen that he (or rather various powerful interested parties are trying to portray on his behalf) is trying to portray.

On the basis of his own report and confession, Saiful now faces the possibility of being jailed for willingly engaging in sodomy (as Anwar's adopted brother was found guilty of and jailed for six months in Sodomy I) if his allegations against Anwar are ‘proven’. Furthermore, Saiful will now be the target of ridicule and harassment about his manhood and sexual preference. No young man will be able to live normally with such shame and accompanying torment and ridicule.

In fact, it is a well-known fact that genuine rape victims in general do not report the crime, and male victims in particular are more inclined not to report sodomy because of the greater shame and implications regarding their manhood. Furthermore, Saiful's allegations against Anwar are so flimsy that unless the Sodomy I process is repeated, Anwar will not be found guilty.

Given these facts, Saiful could be getting a huge reward for alleging that Anwar had sodomised him, a reward which adequately compensates for the stigma and guilt associated with being a partner willing or unwilling in several acts of sodomy The question is who is offering such a handsome reward? Who is so rich and powerful to be able to make an offer which Saiful cannot refuse? Or, more correctly, who stands to gain most from Sodomy II?

The popular arguments on the Net and in the coffee-shops point to Najib. Najib met Saiful on the day after the alleged sodomy. Saiful has access to Najib's aide. The allegation against Anwar has diverted the attention of the public from the revelations made by Private Investigator P Balasubramaniam about Najib in his first statutory declaration. Saiful's allegation has also put Anwar on the defensive and thwarted his plans to challenge the BN government for power by September.

All these suggest that Najib has much to gain from Sodomy II. The reality is that Najib is also a victim of Sodomy II. In the eyes of the public, Najib is not only involved in the Altanuya case but is also masterminding a conspiracy against Anwar. These perceptions will have serious consequences and will most surely weaken Najib's case to be the next PM. The way that Najib has responded to the sodomy allegation against Anwar suggests an individual who is blundering - not a mastermind who has crafted the whole thing, from positioning Saiful in PKR to getting him to accuse Anwar of sodomy. In conclusion, Najib does not stand to gain from Sodomy II.

As for Abdullah Ahamd Badawi, the people punished him on March 8 for his poor performance as PM. His popularity is at an all time low - the high petrol/diesel prices, high food prices, inflation, crime, etc. Sodomy II has added a major political crisis which Abdullah is ill-equipped to handle, even if he is inclined to do so at this time. Either way he will be a loser.

If Anwar is found ‘guilty’ of Sodomy II, the people will hold Abdullah responsible for victimising Anwar, and Abdullah may have to exit well before the declared 2010 deadline. If Anwar were found innocent, that would strengthen Anwar, enabling him to challenge BN and hasten Abdullah's exit. If Sodomy II drags on, there will be serious public unrest and this would also pose a major challenge for Abdullah. Thus, Abdullah is also a victim of Sodomy II.

It looks like that Anwar, Najib and Abdullah are all victims of Sodomy II in one way or another. So who is behind Sodomy II? Who will benefit from Sodomy II? Someone who will lose most if Anwar comes into power. Someone who will go to any extent to prevent Anwar's rise. Someone who no longer accepts Najib as a potential PM. Someone who wants instability in Malaysia. Someone who wants to topple Abdullah.

Someone who cannot accept the rise of the opposition. Someone who does not agree with the new direction that Malaysia is taking in matters such as the judiciary and law and order. Someone whose buddies (cronies) are badly affected by government actions such as termination of mega-projects. Someone who wants to prevent probe and investigation into government misdeeds and mal-practices of the past. Someone who wants to continue the legacy of the past.

Someone who is fully schooled in sodomy matters from Sodomy I. Someone who has strong allies in the government, especially the home ministry, police and AG chambers. Someone who is unscrupulous. Someone who will go any extent to get what he wants. Someone who is extremely rich and powerful. Someone who has finally readied an heir. So, who is behind Sodomy II? A Machiavellian par excellence.

Who is it?

Ken, Malaysiakini

That was what Ken wrote in Malaysiakini on 22 July 2008. I do not, however, agree with his prognosis. Without a doubt he is exonerating Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi from the crime of trying to frame Anwar Ibrahim and has painted them, plus Anwar, as the three victims in this attempted frame-up. And in that same breath Ken is insinuating that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is the real dalang behind the whole thing.

I do not quite agree with this assumption. Yes, Mahathir has no love for Anwar, and vice versa, but the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics is not behind this latest move to frame Anwar on sodomy charges. And I say this because the behind-the-scenes goings-on prior to the sodomy issue exploding onto the Malaysian scene seem to point to Abdullah’s office, or at least to those within his inner circle.

Firstly, Saiful met Najib before the so-called sodomy took place. No doubt, at first, Najib denied meeting him and then later admitted meeting him but explained that it was for purposes of career guidance and to help the young man obtain a scholarship. Later on, Najib confessed he met Saiful to discuss the sodomy allegation against Anwar. This flip-flopping and inconsistency -- denial and then confessing only when it appeared like he could no longer deny it -- makes Najib appear like he is lying and therefore is trying to cover up an evil deed.

Najib’s responses certainly make him look like a liar and therefore he must have something to hide if he is lying. A lying man is certainly the mark of a guilty man, which makes it look like he is behind the conspiracy, or at least involved in the conspiracy to frame Anwar. But this is what they are trying to make us believe. Why this effort to make it appear like Najib is the culprit if not to deflect all attention from whoever is the real culprit?

Now, the day after Saiful met Najib, he met Rodwan in room 619 of the Kuala Lumpur Concorde. Najib did not know this of course. Prior to that meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke over the phone at least eight times. We can only assume that part of this conversation involved asking Saiful to go meet Najib and to make sure that everyone knows about it so that the conspiracy points to Najib. The fact that Saiful brought a friend along only reinforces this assumption, especialy when this friend is aligned to Anwar Ibrahim.

The man who is the real mastermind behind this latest conspiracy to frame Anwar is Shafee Abdullah. Just days before the sodomy allegation exploded, and even before Saiful’s meeting with Rodwan on 25 June 2008, Shafee was in Najib’s house to attend a gathering. And in front of scores of witnesses he asked to be excused early because he ‘had a very big fish to catch’. Shafee conveniently made it known that he is behind the move to catch the ‘big fish’ and he wanted all those in Najib’s house to be aware that Najib was in the know. Actually, Najib did not know what he was talking about and assumed that the ‘big fish’ meant Raja Petra Kamarudin and was with regards to the Statutory Declaration that he had signed just days earlier on 18 June 2008.

Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General. When word got out that he is heading the special police operations centre, which was located in his office, they had to abandon the whole idea.

Shafee’s hands are behind the whole thing. And this can only happen with Abdullah’s blessing. No, it is not Mahathir who is behind this. And it is not Abdullah, Najib and Anwar who are the three victims. The victims are Mahathir, Najib and Anwar. Abdullah is the hidden hand and Shafee is the henchman who was tasked with the job of implementing the evil deed. Politics is not what it always appears to be in Malaysia. That is how Malay politics is played out.

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Rodwan met Saiful three days earlier

Who is Rodwan, other than the fact that he works for the IGP and is known as the police chief’s bagman and go-between with the organised crime syndicate that controls all the drugs, prostitution, loan-sharking and gambling rackets?

Wednesday, 27 May 2009 | THE CORRIDORS OF POWER | Raja Petra Kamarudin

At 2.30pm on Wednesday, 25 June 2008, Senior Assistant Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof met Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. Prior to this secret meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke on the phone at least eight (8) times.

Three days later, at 2.00pm on 28 June 2008, Saiful went to see Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid of the Hospital Pusrawi to ‘complain’ that he had been sodomised by ‘a very important person’ and that he wished to lodge a police report. The doctor, however, found no traces or evidence that he had been sodomised and suggested, for purposes of the police report, that Saiful go to a government hospital.

Who is Rodwan, other than the fact that he works for the IGP and is known as the police chief’s bagman and go-between with the organised crime syndicate that controls all the drugs, prostitution, loan-sharking and gambling rackets? Well, read the following archived reports to get a better understanding of this scumbag and slime-ball named Rodwan. Maybe then you can understand why he met Saiful in a hotel room three days before the sodomy allegation against Anwar Ibrahim exploded.

Berita Harian
Rabu, 30 Disember 1998

Seorang pakar forensik Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) memberitahu Mahkamah Tinggi di sini hari ini bahawa contoh darah Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim tidak boleh digunakan untuk ujian DNA kerana ia diambil dan disediakan bagi ujian HIV, Hepatitis B dan VD (penyakit kelamin).

Dr Zahari Noor berkata, oleh kerana itu beliau menolak permintaan polis sebanyak dua kali supaya contoh darah itu digunakan untuk ujian DNA. Menurutnya, ketika di Ibu Pejabat Polis Bukit Aman pada 28 September lalu bagi mengambil darah Anwar, beliau ditanya oleh Asisten Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof sama ada ujian DNA boleh dilakukan terhadap Anwar. Katanya, beliau menasihatkan polis supaya tidak mengambil darah Anwar untuk ujian DNA kerana Anwar hanya memberi persetujuan supaya darahnya digunakan bagi ujian HIV, Hepatitis B dan VD.

"Pada 15 Oktober lalu, Mohd Rodwan dan SAC I (Senior Asisten Komisioner) Musa Hassan datang ke HKL dan bertanya sama ada mereka boleh mengambil contoh darah Anwar untuk analisis DNA," katanya.

Dr Zahari: Kami memberikan empat sebab kepada polis mengapa ujian DNA tidak boleh dilakukan terhadap darah Anwar:

* contoh itu tidak disediakan untuk analisis DNA,

* ia tidak sesuai untuk ujian DNA,

* pendapat kami ialah keputusan ujian DNA itu tidak boleh dipercayai.

* ia boleh membawa keputusan yang mengelirukan kerana kami menyimpan contoh darah itu di dalam bekas biasa tanpa pengawet atau EDTA.

Katanya, mereka kemudian mencadangkan kepada polis bahawa mereka bersedia pada bila-bila masa untuk mengambil contoh darah Anwar di penjara Sungai Buloh untuk ujian DNA jika tertuduh membenarkannya.


"In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution's witnesses it was exposed that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress," said Sivarasa.

"When confronted with this fact the prosecution amended its charge and persuaded the judge, Augustine Paul, to expunge the entire DNA evidence from the record, preventing Anwar's lawyers from responding."


Police have never dilly-dallied in investigating the alleged sodomy against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim since the case was reported to police on June 28, said Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar. He said the police, instead, had been relentlessly seeking relevant and the latest information, besides giving the case priority, as it was a high-profile case.

"We want to solve this case as soon as possible. The investigating officer is constantly looking for new leads. We are doing our best and we need the cooperation of all quarters concerned," he told Bernama when contacted here Tuesday.

Ismail was asked to comment on Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar's statement on Monday, asking for police to speed up the investigations into the sodomy allegation against the Parti Keadilan Rakyat advisor.

He said since the police investigations began, some quarters had been making speculations and statements that could interfere with the investigations.

"I wish to warn everyone, including bloggers, not to disturb police investigations by disseminating material or information that is inaccurate or false.

"Action will be taken against those who deliberately try to interfere with the investigations. Let the police do a meticulous job," he added.


Sources told The Malaysian Insider that investigators are "crossing the t's and dotting the i's" and will be relying on Anwar's DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) samples from 1998 when he faced similar charges which cost him the chance to be prime minister.

"Nobody wants a repeat of 1998 when the prosecution had to amend the charges. Anwar has alleged that he had an alibi for the 24 hours on the day the offence took place. So the authorities have to check everything out," said an official who is familiar with the investigations.

"We understand that there is an attempt to quash credibility of the case even before the matter goes to court. The police cannot say too much because then they will be accused of trial by media and ministers cannot say much because they will be accused to interference.

"This case is built on strong scientific evidence," the official added.


This was posted on Susan Loone’s blog:


I would like to write the following statement in the name of GOD whom I believe.

I am a government doctor in the rank of consultant working in Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL). I know personally the doctors who examined Saiful on that day - 28 June 2008.

The so-called medical report mentioned in the NST is a fabrication or imagination by the UMNO paper. There is no such medical report submitted to the polis yet.

When examining Saiful, the specialist could not find any signs of Saiful being sodomised. Saiful was very cheerful, unlike real sodomised patients who will usually be very sad and disturbed.

Saiful was subsequently admitted to the ward and observed for a day. He was completely well in the ward and not emotionally disturbed.

Please let RPK know of this.


This article was first published in Malaysia Today on 30 July 2008

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Police to ask Interpol to look out for Raja Petra


KUALA LUMPUR: Police will ask Interpol to look out for Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Raja Kamarudin who has a warrant of arrest against him for failing to turn up at court for trial.

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan said Tuesday he would liaise with his counterparts especially his Australian counterpart as Raja Petra is believed to be there.

“We will inform our friends through proper channel as there is a warrant out for him,” he said.

On Tuesday morning, Raja Petra was slapped with another warrant of arrest after he failed to turn up for his criminal defamation trial at a Sessions Court here.

Sessions Court judge Mohamad Sekeri Mamat issued the arrest warrant after DPP Anselm Charles Fernandis applied for the order.

The judge also issued a show-cause notice to the former Internal Security Act detainee’s wife, Marina Lee Abdullah, as his bailor, for not being at court to explain his absence.

An arrest warrant was also issued by the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court on April 23 against Raja Petra after he failed to turn up for his sedition trial. He had claimed trial on May 6 last year to publishing a seditious article on April 25 via his news portal.

When asked about the presence of prosecution witnesses in court Tuesday, DPP Anselm told reporters that 12 policemen and two civilians had been subpoenaed for the trial.

Raja Petra, 59, had on July 17 last year claimed trial to three counts of criminal defamation over his statutory declaration on the murder of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu.

The father of three boys and two girls is alleged to have defamed the then Deputy Prime Minister’s wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, by making a libellous statement in the declaration which he affirmed on June 18 when he knew that it would tarnish her good name.

The grandfather of four also faces two similar charges against Leftenan Kolonel Norhayati Hassan and her husband Leftenan Kolonel Abdul Aziz Buyong.

Raja Petra is said to have committed the offences at High Court (Civil 5) at the Jalan Duta court complex at 10:25am on June 18, last year.

At the outset of court proceedings, DPP Anselm applied for the arrest warrant against the editor and the notice for his wife saying that both were aware that the criminal defamation trial was set for three days from Tuesday.

Raja Petra’s lawyer, Amarjit Singh Sidhu, told the judge that the defence team was waiting to get a trial date at the Court of Appeal for their appeal on the transfer order involving the same case.

“We have now received the appeal records. It is on the transfer of this case from the Magistrates Court to the Sessions Court,” he added.

Upon hearing this, DPP Anselm told the judge that it was a separate matter.

The judge agreed that it was a different issue and immediately issued the order.

He set July 2 for mention of the arrest warrant and show-cause notice.

Raja Petra had failed in his bid on Feb 13 to get his case transferred back to the magistrate’s court for trial.

He had on Nov 25 applied to the High Court to have his case heard by the Magistrates Court.

However, High Court Judicial Commissioner Zainal Azman Ab Aziz ruled that the decision by magistrate Nazran Mohd Sham on Aug 15 last year to transfer the case to the Sessions Court upon application by the Public Prosecutor under Section 177 of the Criminal Procedure Code was valid and in order.

Raja Petra claims to be in a self-exile from Selangor because of a dispute with the state’s Palace.

He claimed in a Malaysia Today article that he would not be attending the hearings not only because of his brush with the Palace but also due to his fear of another Internal Security Act arrest.

He also said that he did not want to face possible treason charges.

According to the press report, the police believes that the editor is now in Brisbane.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Cops: RPK now staying in Brisbane

Star Online |Sunday May 24, 2009 | By ANDREW SAGAYAM and ROYCE CHEAH

PETALING JAYA: Police have confirmed that online news portal Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamarudin is in Brisbane.

A police source said the former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee had contacts in Australia who had arranged accommodation for him and his wife Marina Lee Abdullah.

Raja Petra was not present on Friday to face his sedition trial at the Sessions Court here. The court had issued a warrant of arrest against him after he first failed to turn up in court on April 23 for the trial.

On his news portal that same day, Raja Petra had posted his reasons for his non-attendance, saying he was in self-exile from Selangor because of a dispute with the state’s royalty.

The arrest warrant and a show-cause notice for Marina — who is his bailor — summoning her to explain her husband’s absence at court had not been executed.

The court set July 17 for mention of the case, saying that the next course of action would be decided by judge Rozina Ayob.

Raja Petra has, however, been actively blogging on the news portal with a recent post issuing an apology to the nation for the actions of his son, Raja Azman, who recently pleaded guilty to four separate counts of theft, receiving stolen property and criminal trespass.

He said he and his wife knew that their son was picked up by the police after running into some trouble.

I rest my case

From time to time we hear stories about the Malaysian judiciary that make the prostitutes operating in Jalan Alor look like Mother Teresa by comparison. (I mean I heard lah people say that they operate in Jalan Alor).

Saturday, 23 May 2009 | NO HOLDS BARRED | Raja Petra Kamarudin

However, I'm rather interested in asking him to reply me. If the trial is held in KL, would he appear, since it's not part of Selangor?

But of course not, there's the ISA threat there.

So you know what I'm going to do for you, RPK?

I'll write to the Home Minister to address that fear. Perhaps a guarantee from him and the IGP should be well enough for you to show up?

And since we want to see justice served, perhaps the Bar Council should step up as well, be proactive for once.

Also, why not ask the prosecutor to transfer the case to KL anyways, since you're apparently "self exiled" from the state of Selangor.

With these conditions met, how now, RPK?

Posted by: Hafidz Baharom


Last year, in a press conference in the lobby of the courts in Jalan Duta, Kuala Lumpur, lawyer Muhammad Shafee Bin Abdullah (in English that translates to ‘Praiseworthy Broker the Son of the Servant of Allah’ -- but don’t for one minute you believe that utter bullshit) told about 20 or 30 journalists that he wants to meet me in court. To make sure I agree to go to court, he said he would allow me to choose the judge I would like. And if I do not have money to pay the legal fees he would be very happy to help cover the cost on my behalf.

Shafee Abdullah (left) and his client Razak Baginda

Anyone who did not know Shafee better would probably think he was just bragging even though he does have a name Praiseworthy Broker. Note that, according to his name, he is not the servant of Allah but the son of the servant of Allah. He, personally, is the Praiseworthy Broker and any praiseworthy broker worth his brokerage fees must certainly be able to indulge in the widely rumoured and long-standing problem of judge fixing in the Malaysian courts.

VK Linggam and Chief Justice Eusoff Chin on an overseas holiday together

If I remember right, the Linggamtape scandal was also about judge fixing. However, they first had to fix who gets elevated and promoted before they can get these judges to fix cases. It is said by those who walk in the corridors of the palace of injustice, if you want to fix a civil case then go to Linggam and if it is a criminal case you go to Shafee. But be prepared to pay through your backside because that would probably be what you will need to sell to afford the exorbitant fees.

Back in 1998 or thereabouts, a ‘poison pen letter’ -- purportedly written by a judge named Syed Aidid -- made its rounds in Malaysia. In this very lengthy letter, the author identified all those judges who were on the take and what their fetishes were. Power, money and sex, but not necessarily in that order, were of course the common denominator for all. Syed Aidid’s letter would have been shorter, maybe half a page or so instead of the 40 pages, if he had listed down all those judges who were clean and pure.

From time to time we hear stories about the Malaysian judiciary that make the prostitutes operating in Jalan Alor look like Mother Teresa by comparison. (I mean I heard lah people say that they operate in Jalan Alor). Sometimes we really just can’t believe that all this could be true and that they must be exaggerating a wee bit -- that is, until you end up in court and discover not only is it true but actually worse than what they say.

Hafidz Baharom who has offered to help fix my judges

And read what Hafidz Baharom said in his Blog posting above. Yes, that’s right, he can help arrange to transfer my many cases to the court of my choice. Hey, who the hell is he? I mean, if it were Slime-ball Number One, Praiseworthy Broker the Son of the Servant of Allah, I would quite understand. After all they don’t call him Slime-ball Number One for nothing and his father did name him Praiseworthy Broker. But for a so unimportant and extremely insignificant fellow like Hafidz, who is way low down the food chain, to be able to offer to fix the judges on my behalf, it appears like this problem is even worse than we initially thought.

I rest my case. And if you still have doubts about the sorry state of the Malaysian judiciary then maybe I can interest you in some swampland that you should invest all your life savings in without further delay.

The Malaysia-Singapore ‘cold war’

Surely Dr Mahathir can’t agree to Najib giving in to Singapore’s demands like what is currently happening. Are we going to see Dr Mahathir going berserk like back in 2006 with all these concessions Najib is granting Singapore?

Saturday, 23 May 2009 - THE CORRIDORS OF POWER - Raja Petra Kamarudin

An old acquaintance of mine who was once quite senior in the Fisheries Department related this story, which he said stunned everybody in the room. The occasion was a briefing session and the man who was the target of the briefing was Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the then Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.

This government officer who was conducting the briefing tried to impress Dr Mahathir on what they were doing. He went into great detail talking about their plans and strategies and how things are going to improve once these plans and strategies are in place. And he concluded by assuring Dr Mahathir that it will work because this is exactly what Singapore is doing.

Dr Mahathir gave the briefing officer a long and hard stare and said, “Please never mention Singapore in front of me again. Don’t you know we are at war with Singapore?”

From that day on, word spread like wildfire that you must never, at all costs, mention Singapore in front of Dr Mahathir, unless it is in a negative light that is. To say that Malaysia too is doing such and such because Singapore is doing the same is to invite disaster and a dead-end career in the government.

We both had a good laugh and I never thought about this incident again until 2006, something like 30 years after I was first told the story about the briefing session. And 2006 was when I started my association with Dr Mahathir soon after the dialogue session that Malaysia Today organised at the Kelab Century Paradise in Taman Melawati in Kuala Lumpur.

“Singapore is just a little red dot,” Dr Mahathir would tell all and sundry, sometimes to a crowd of 1,000 or more.

Why is Dr Mahathir so upset with Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi? Because Pak Lah tunduk (kow tow) to Singapore.

Why is Dr Mahathir so upset that his Crooked Bridge has been aborted, and at a price that is more costly than if they went ahead and built it on top of that? Because Singapore does not want it -- so, by aborting it, Malaysia is bowing to Singapore’s demands.

Why is Dr Mahathir so angry with Kalimullah (whom he calls Hindu God and Muslim Priest)? Because Kalimullah is a Singapore agent.

Why is Dr Mahathir so angry with Khairy Jamaluddin? Because Khairy works for Singapore and is being funded by that ‘little red dot’.

Anything and everything even remotely associated with Singapore is a no-no in Dr Mahathir’s books.

“Of course I can’t get along with Singapore,” laments Dr Mahathir. “I can’t go to Singapore and play golf with Singapore’s leaders and pat each other on the back like those in Pak Lah’s government.”

“Who cares if Singapore wants a new straight bridge to replace the Causeway or not. They can keep their half of the Causeway. We will demolish our half and build half a bridge. And if half a bridge is too short then we shall make it longer by building a crooked bridge.”

“Lee Kuan Yew told me that Goh Chok Tong is too sentimental. That’s why he does not want to see the Causeway demolished. So we will have to wait until Chok Tong retires and then, after he retires, we shall demolish the whole Causeway.”

“Malaysia fought hard to gain independence from Britain. We opposed the British and the British plan for a Malayan Union. However, after 50 years of Merdeka, we are still not independent. We still can’t decide what to do in our own country. Singapore tells us what we can do in our own country. So we are not really that independent after all.”

And it goes on and on -- Singapore this and Singapore that. It is all about Singapore. And all of Dr Mahathir’s unhappiness is because Singapore is the cause of everything that is wrong with this country and all his plans are being torpedoed because of Singapore.

There are those in Umno who say that in 2006 I abandoned Anwar Ibrahim and then jumped into Dr Mahathir’s camp. Then I left Dr Mahathir and swung over to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah’s camp. And after that I left Tengku Razaleigh to return to Anwar. Why I ‘left’ Dr Mahathir is not clear because there was no quarrel or bad blood between Dr Mahathir and me. I sort of just moved on without any reason offered.

That is what the Umno chaps say and they say this openly enough in their Blogs.

True, I did ‘swing over’ to Dr Mahathir back in 2006. But come 2008, I was involved in the general elections and after that the Pematang Pauh by-election followed by the Kuala Terengganu by-election. In between that I was arrested for sedition and then for criminal defamation after which I was detained a couple of months under the Internal Security Act. So that sort of kept me busy for the last year or so, in between going to the police station numerous times and the many court appearances.

Nevertheless, while I may have been too busy to personally go meet Dr Mahathir in his house and office like I used to from 2006 to early 2008, I still kept in touch by phone and by passing messages through a mutual friend. I also met Matthias many times for lunch, tea or dinner to spend hours discussing matters of mutual interest. And most times the messages would be passed to and from Dr Mahathir through these people.

Dr Mahathir understood that our association was only because we both wanted the same thing -- we both wanted to see Pak Lah ousted from office. That was the one thing that united us. However, after Pak Lah leaves, who should be the man to replace him?

Dr Mahathir knew that my choice of successor was Tengku Razaleigh. In fact, I had personally gone to meet Dr Mahathir in his house during Hari Raya of 2007 to inform him about this. Furthermore, we had a series of meetings with Tengku Razaleigh together with Mukhriz’s boys to discuss how Tengku Razaleigh could make a bid for the Umno Presidency.

I was not naïve in thinking that Anwar would be the next prime minister. This was before the 8 March 2008 general election and we were not sure yet at that time whether there was even going to be a Pakatan Rakyat (or maybe there would be three- or four-corner fights with PKR, PAS and DAP all contesting the same seat against Barisan Nasional). So the man who becomes prime minister has to be someone from Umno and that would have to be Tengku Razaleigh.

But we were not really sure whether Dr Mahathir would endorse Tengku Razaleigh in spite of Mukhriz’s boys appearing to be backing him. When we asked Dr Mahathir to his face whether he preferred Najib over Tengku Razaleigh, he did not give the impression he preferred Najib.

We never thought Dr Mahathir would want Najib because of the ‘Singapore connection’. He is angry with Pak Lah, Kalimullah and Khairy because they are said to be tools or agents of Singapore. But then would this not also be so for Najib?

Tun Daim Zainuddin has personally told Dr Mahathir that Singapore possesses all the evidence that Najib, Razak Baginda and Altantuya met at the Oriental Hotel in Marina Square one year before she died. This means, with the evidence that Singapore possesses, they would be able to blackmail Najib. Surely Dr Mahathir would not want someone who can be blackmailed into doing Singapore’s bidding become the next prime minister knowing how he feels about Singapore and those perceived as under Singapore’s control?

Najib has just made a trip to Singapore and while in Singapore he announced that Malaysia agrees to build a third bridge linking Malaysia and Singapore. Third bridge? If there is going to be a third bridge then there would certainly be a second bridge. And we are no longer talking about crooked bridges as what Dr Mahathir wants. We are talking about straight bridges as what Singapore wants. And Najib also announced that the New Economic Policy would most likely be abolished as what Singapore would like to see.

Hmmm…this is interesting. Does Dr Mahathir know what Najib is doing? Surely Dr Mahathir can’t agree to Najib giving in to Singapore’s demands like what is currently happening. Are we going to see Dr Mahathir going berserk like back in 2006 with all these concessions Najib is granting Singapore?

Well, Dr Mahathir knows I support him in his move to oust Pak Lah. But I just can’t support him on the move to replace Pak Lah with Najib. My choice of successor was Tengku Razaleigh and I never hid that fact from Dr Mahathir. Probably the whole of Umno knows this as well. Anwar Ibrahim and the PKR people certainly do.

Of course, if Pakatan Rakyat forms the government, and Anwar Ibrahim becomes prime minister instead, that is also okay with me. But back in 2006 no one imagined that Pakatan Rakyat would ever be formed, let alone win five states and deny Barisan Nasional its two-thirds majority in parliament.

So the choice was either Tengku Razaleigh or Najib and I never dreamt that Dr Mahathir would choose Najib considering he is so pantang about Singapore and would never accept as prime minister someone whom Singapore can squeeze by the balls -- especially when this someone can be blackmailed about a very secret and sensitive meeting with a woman in the Oriental Hotel in Marina Square who is later found murdered.

Friday, May 22, 2009

Sigh… Hafidz Baharom does not respect me

But they refuse to allow it to end there. They refuse to acknowledge that they can’t get me in spite of bending the rules and moving the goalposts so many times halfway through the trial. This is no longer even a kangaroo court. They have set new standards for what a kangaroo court should look like.

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Today, Hafidz Baharom’s piece ‘Why I don't respect RPK’ was published in The Star. Once upon a time, The Star used to be known as ‘Suara Tunku Abdul Rahman’ -- when it was then merely a regional newspaper for Penang folks. Now, of course, it is better known as Suara MCA and has since been transformed into a national newspaper.

Back in the early 1990s, I too used to write for The Star. At that time I was just a freelance columnist writing for the Cycling, and later, Motorcycling columns in The Weekender. The Weekender’s editor then was Sharifah Intan. I think she is the Tunku’s granddaughter but I never did ask her.

Hafidz echoes what many Umno types have repeatedly said: berani kerana benar. What he means is: I have lied. So I should be man enough to face the music and walk into jail with my head held up high. First of all, they assume I have lied. Secondly, since I have lied, then I should suffer a sham trial and accept the verdict of a kangaroo court and go quietly to jail.

Okay, let us focus on that one issue for the meantime. We can always talk about the other issues later.

The issue they raise is: I have lied. Since the court has not ruled either way just yet, let us assume, therefore, that I have. And we will give them the benefit of the doubt and agree that I have lied. I shall not dispute that. And this means I need to go to court so that the court can rule whether I did or did not lie.

I have no problems with that. In fact, in the beginning, that was what my sedition trial was all about. Superintendent Gan made a police report against me alleging that I had lied. And I was arrested and charged for sedition because it is said I had lied. And I faced trial and defended myself against the allegation that I had lied.

Then Gan was called to testify. He was not my witness but the prosecution’s witness. And he went into great detail relating how he arrived at the conclusion that I had lied -- and which was why he made that police report against me.

It was an open and shut case. Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin lied in that article he wrote. So Gan was forced to make a police report against me. He was the investigating officer in the Altantuya murder. He knows the full details of the murder investigation. And he therefore knows very well that what I wrote are total lies.

Then it came to our turn to cross-examin him. He had already testified for the prosecution. Now it was our turn to cross-examin him on his testimony he gave the prosecution.

And that was when he changed his story.

No, he did not investigate the Altantuya murder after all. Another person did. So he is not that knowledgeable about the details of the murder investigation. He just knows small patches of the investigation.

Okay, but he said I had lied. Which parts of that article were the lies? My lawyer went through the article and identified four (4) paragraphs where, according to Gan’s police report, I was supposed to have lied. Okay, now let us look at the charge. The charge says seven (7) paragraphs contain lies. But only three (3) of the seven (7) tally with the three (3) of the four (4) that Gan had identified. This means there is one paragraph that does not tally. So, Gan has four, the charge says seven, and there is one where Gan and the prosecutor can’t agree whether is a lie or not.

The next step is to try to establish the truth. Only by establishing the truth can the lies be established. Since I was alleged to have lied, let us then seek the truth and only when we know the truth can it be proven whether I had lied or not.

But when Gan was asked about the truth he refused to reply to YB Gobind’s questions. He would just not reveal what was the truth. Each time he was asked a question he replied he does not know or does not know how to answer or does not know what to say.

How then does he know I had lied when he does not know what is the truth? Well, he came to the conclusion that I had lied because he had never stumbled across what I had written before. This means, if I were to write that female mosquitoes bite humans while male mosquitoes feed on fruits and not on blood, since he had never stumbled across this fact before, this means I must be lying. There are no two ways about it.

YB Gobind then goes through the article, paragraph by paragraph. He reads each paragraph and asks Gan where in that paragraph are the lies. Then it is discovered that Gan was not able to tell the court where the lies were. In short, what he initially thought to be lies were in fact not.

How did Gan then come to the conclusion they were lies when he made that police report, but when testifying on the stand he can’t stand by his allegation that I had lied? And remember, his police report said I had lied and that I had committed sedition because I had lied.

At this point, when it became clear that the prosecution’s case against me on the basis that I had committed a crime of sedition because I had lied appeared to be falling apart, the prosecutor stood up and told the court that the truth of the matter, or otherwise, is not important. Sedition has nothing to do with true or false. It would be seditious and therefore a crime even if I had told the truth.

But Gan’s police report and testimony were very clear. It was based on the fact that I was supposed to have lied. Now that the lie allegation can no longer stand, they want the court to forget about the lying part and focus on whether I did write what I was alleged to have written even if it is true. And even if it is true they still want the court to send me to jail.

To add insult to injury, the prosecution wants the court to ignore the four or seven paragraphs and whether one paragraph does not tally between the police report and the charge. The article, the court was told, has to be looked at in its entirety, not based on four paragraphs or seven paragraphs.

But the police report clearly marked four paragraphs. And it was these four paragraphs that constituted my so-called crime. The charge, on the other hand, marked seven paragraphs. And this was why I was on trial. Now they want the court to agree that all these paragraphs are no longer relevant and instead the article must be seen as a whole, minus the marked paragraphs.

Okay, the court was told, forget about whether I had lied or in fact had told the truth. Forget the police report. Forget even the charge. Let us just look at the article. Did I or did I not write that article? That is all that matters. And if I did then I must be sent to jail.

Fine, let us do just that. Let us forget about whether I had lied or in fact had told the truth. Let us forget the police report. Let us even forget the charge. Let us instead just look at the article. Did I or did I not write that article? That will be the focus.

The prosecution then adduced the article. This, according to the prosecution, was the article I was alleged to have written. And this article was downloaded from the website called Malaysia Today.

Then it was discovered that the article was NOT downloaded from Malaysia Today. It was in fact typed out. This means this was not the original evidence. It was created or fabricated and NOT downloaded from Malaysia Today. For all intents and purposes, I did not write that article. They, the prosecution, wrote that article. It is a copy. It is not an original article download from Malaysia Today.

When they realised that it was game over, they asked for a postponement so that they could amend the charge. The new charge, this time around, will have the real article downloaded from Malaysia Today.

Then they read out the new charge. But the new charge also had a fabricated article. It DID NOT have the original article downloaded from Malaysia Today. So, again, they were stuck. And at this point the court should have just acquitted me without the necessity of my defence having to be called because the charge was clearly defective and the evidence had been fabricated.

But they refused to give up. Instead, again, they applied for a postponement so that they can do a SECOND examination of the computer. They already did one examination but could not find any copy of that article. The article just did not exist. That is why they had to fabricate the evidence -- because they could not find the evidence.

And why did they need to do a SECOND examination of my computer? So that they could prove that I had used the computer to update the website. This would be the evidence to prove I had published the article.

At this point they were asked how, in the first place, did they even know that the computer belongs to me? Well, because it was confiscated from my house. Am I living in that house alone? No! When they raided my house there were other people there as well. Then how do they know that I own that computer? They don’t, they just assume.

In fact, they confiscated TWO computers and one of them actually belongs to someone else and the files in it prove this. But when they confiscated the two computers they never asked me whether I owned those computers and I never said that I did. So who owns those two computers? The police do not know.

They then summoned an IT expert to testify. They wanted the IT expert to testify that the computers the police had confiscated were used to update Malaysia Today on the day the article was published. The IT expert, however, testified that the computers never accessed Malaysia Today on the day in question. In fact, many days before the alleged crime was committed, the computers they confiscated never accessed the Internet at all, let alone Malaysia Today.

So there goes their case against me. They confiscated two computers that they can’t prove belong to me. Even if the computers do belong to me, they were never used to publish the offending article. In fact, there is no copy of that article in the two computers so there is no evidence I had even written it in the first place. They can’t prove that I lied. They are no longer interested whether I lied or not because they can’t prove that I lied. So where do they go from there? And why are they still pursuing their case against me when they no longer have a case?

Not willing to admit that they no longer have a case, the prosecution told the court they still have many witnesses to call. Okay, they are supposed to tell the court before the trial starts who they are calling as witnesses. How many NEW witnesses are they calling and who are they? They don’t know yet. They are still figuring it out and will inform the court later once they have decided.

Yes, berani kerana benar, all these people say. If I am benar, then I must be berani to face the court. Hey, I did. I did just that; I faced the court. And I allowed them to build their case against me. I allowed them to get to the truth so that they can establish that I had committed the crime of lying and therefore I am seditious. But they failed to do so, each step of the way. And each time they failed they asked for a postponement so that they could go back to the drawing board and come out with new charges, new witnesses, new testimony, new evidence, new rules of the game, and whatnot. And, still, they failed to nail me.

But they refuse to allow it to end there. They refuse to acknowledge that they can’t get me in spite of bending the rules and moving the goalposts so many times halfway through the trial. This is no longer even a kangaroo court. They have set new standards for what a kangaroo court should look like.

Yes, berani kerana benar. I berani walk away from this sham trial and tell them to go to hell kerana benar. And I berani face the warrant of arrest they have issued for not turning up in court kerana benar. And I berani say to their faces: no more bullshit. And I berani tell them I refuse to allow them to detain me, yet again, under the Internal Security Act. And I berani do all this kerana I benar. And I will not lose any sleep over the matter just because Hafidz Baharom does not respect me and challenges me with berani kerana benar.

Najib’s latest strategy: perception war

Friday, 22 May 2009 | Raja Petra Kamarudin

if they can’t get a three-zero verdict, then it must at least be a two-one verdict with Zainun ruling in favour of the opposition. Then the government would be seen as doing the ‘right’ and ‘fair’ thing and the opposition would no longer have any grounds to complain.


Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is an expert at this game. That is why he is called the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics. Politics is a game of perception. It does not matter what you really are. It is what people perceive you to be that matters. And no one can play this game better than the Tun. Does this sound like I am singing his praises? You can bet your sweet ninny I am. And I make no apologies for that. After all, credit should be given where credit is due.

In the early days of his premiership, Mahathir engaged the services of Saatchi & Saatchi. Those who had to pass Wisma Damansara every day to go to work probably noticed their office at that building on the hill. Their biggest client in Malaysia was Umno and the fees that Umno had to pay meant the firm could afford such affluence and opulence in a prime location in Kuala Lumpur. After all, it was not really Umno that was paying. The money came from the government coffer, which means the taxpayers were footing the bill. (Go here to read more about the company

When it eventually leaked that Umno had engaged the services of Saatchi & Saatchi, and word had it that this was a Jewish-owned company, Umno had to disengage itself from this company and the new assignments were entrusted to Lim Kok Wing, the Malaysian genius of advertising and PR who, amongst others, conjured the Rakan Muda and many other programmes aimed at creating an impression the government was on the ball.

When Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi took over as Prime Minister, he set up his own unit, infamously known as the Tingkat Empat or Fourth Floor team. They are supposed to have been the brains behind Pak Lah’s administration that would help guide him on what to do. But the problem was, the Fourth Floor bit off more than it could chew and it forgot the golden rule of Malaysian politics -- which is one just does not cross swords with the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics and hopes to get away with it.

Soon, Tingkat Empat became a four-letter word and Pak Lah was forced to downplay its role when members of his own Cabinet began to hit out at them. Pak Lah tried to defend them as best as he could but it was futile. Mahathir had already decided that they should be buried and buried they would be. Eventually, Pak Lah had to distance himself from his own advisers from the Fourth Floor and that meant he had to fly blind without the advantage of guidance from his team of advisors.

Najib realises the value of a good team of public relations wizards. So he too has his own ‘Fourth Floor’. But he is not using a bunch of young wet-behind-the-ears Oxbridge graduates the way Pak Lah did. Najib knows that Mahathir would never accept this, as his suspicion for such young punks has not diminished. Najib, just like Mahathir before that, has outsourced the services of a team of experts. And they have come up with a great plan on how to ensure that Umno not only wins the next general election, but wins back all the states it has lost plus its two-thirds majority in parliament as well.

Najib’s plan is multi-prong. First he has to give the impression that he is bringing reforms to Malaysia. The New Economic Policy will be reviewed. Some liberalisation and relaxation of the rules will be introduced. Even the FIC may be closed down to give more confidence to investors and the Chinese business population that the government is really serious about abolishing the many rules and regulations that favour the Bumiputeras.

There will be a lot of window-dressing and some will be made to appear as more than just window-dressing. But what is going to be the thrust of the strategy will be the battle on the political front.

Pakatan Rakyat is seen to have made great inroads in the recent general election on 8 March 2008. Since then it has displayed impressive wins in four out of five by-elections, outdoing even how they performed on 8 March 2008. Najib cannot afford to allow Pakatan Rakyat to be seen as still on a winning streak. And Anwar Ibrahim, in particular, must be made to appear like he has lost the wind in his sails.

To steal Anwar’s thunder, Najib decided to refrain from contesting the Penanti by-election. It appears like Najib made this decision against the wishes of Mahathir. It would be good if people are thinking that because then it would also appear like Najib is in total control and no one is dictating what he should do, in particular Mahathir.

If they were to contest Penanti they would lose anyway, and lose worse than on 8 March 2008. But now, since Umno is not contesting that by-election, Umno will not have to lose. And if Umno did not lose then Anwar’s party did not win as well. This would be the first step -- deny Anwar the pleasure of victory. Who, after all, is going to be impressed with a walkover or menang tanpa tanding. Call Umno chicken or whatever. The bottom line is it did not lose Penanti and therefore Anwar’s party did not win as well.

The next issue would be Perak. They know Perak is a no-go. Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional are equally matched. Then we have the three so-called independents who vote with Barisan Nasional. But two of the three have corruption charges hanging over their heads. And if they are convicted, then there would be two by-elections, which Pakatan Rakyat will easily win -- and this would mean the opposition would now have a one-seat majority over Barisan Nasional in the Perak state government.

The alternative would be to drop the corruption charges against these two ‘independent’ state assemblymen. But that has already been predicted and would come as no surprise. Umno would be expected to do just that. So how would they explain that it was all done above board and that there is no manipulation?

Say what you like, if the charges are dropped, public perception would still be that they are guilty as hell and the only reason the charges were dropped is because Umno wants to avoid two by-elections, which they are going to lose badly. Anyway, even Mahathir is against Umno taking these two. So they will have to remain as independents without being allowed into Umno until the day they lose their case and get sent to jail.

The only viable option open to Najib is to dissolve the Perak state assembly and hold new state elections. But that must not be on the opposition’s terms. That must be on Umno’s terms. Zambry has to be declared the legitimate Menteri Besar of Perak and then he shall seek permission from the Sultan for the dissolution of the state assembly. They can’t afford for Nizar to be the one who requests the dissolution of the state assembly. That would hurt Najib’s and Umno’s image real bad.

At 3.00pm today, the Appeal Court will be delivering its decision as to who is the legitimate Menteri Besar of Perak. The Chief Justice, Tan Sri Dato' Seri Zaki Azmi, has been told to make sure the verdict is in favour of Umno.

Zaki, in turn, has instructed the President of the Court of Appeal, Tan Sri Dato' Seri Alauddin Dato' Mohd. Sheriff, to tell the three judges -- Justices Abdul Raus Sharif, Datuk Zainun Ali and Ahmad Maarop -- to deliver the ‘right’ verdict. If they can’t get a three-zero verdict, then it must at least be a two-one verdict with Zainun ruling in favour of the opposition. Then the government would be seen as doing the ‘right’ and ‘fair’ thing and the opposition would no longer have any grounds to complain.

After that, Zambry can go meet the Sultan and request the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly. But it will be Umno that does this, not Nizar or the opposition. And Umno does it although it can continue ruling Perak without dissolving the state assembly and calling for fresh state elections. How can you now say that Najib is not fair or is power crazy?

And this will prove that Najib is a rakyat’s Prime Minister and someone who knows how to do the right thing when required. Anwar and Pakatan Rakyat will lose the right to claim that it called for new state elections. The court, in fact, ruled that Barisan Nasional is the legitimate government. Barisan Nasional could have continued running the state until the next general elections. But instead it chose to dissolve the state assembly as the people wanted them to.

Sure, it will be very difficult for Barisan Nasional to win if new state elections are held. But what difference does it make anyway? They are still in a deadlock as it is. This way it would be seen like Barisan Nasional is not illegally holding on to power but is ‘gentleman’ enough to listen to the people even though the court has delivered its verdict that they are the legitimate government of Perak.

That, according to Najib’s team of PR consultants, is how they will take the wind out of Anwar’s sails and steal the thunder from him. As it is, Anwar and Pakatan Rakyat are losing momentum. And the only way to make them lose even more momentum would be to deny them those little battles that they could win easily enough. And if battles are unavoidable, then make sure it is on your terms and not on Anwar’s terms.

Perception is a very powerful tool. Mahathir knew this. Najib knows this as well. And he is fast learning how to become an expert at this game of perception just like his mentor before this was.

search box