Anakbuah Biduanda

4. It was quite a liberal paper and contained articles by such well-known personalities as Dr Lim Chong Eu (Gerakan), Dr R Kumar (Labour Party), Lim Kit Siang (DAP), Syed Hussain Ali (Parti Rakyat), Tengku Zaid (PMIP), Goh Cheng Teik, Ismail Ghani and several others.

5. I was also a contributor writing "In Defense of Feudalism". I was a Member of Parliament then.

6. The article that most interested me was one by Dr Lim Chong Yah, an economist, entitled "The Future of Malaysian Economy".

7. In it he gave a picture of the Malaysian Economy in 1967, 10 years after Merdeka.

8. The population was a mere 10 million and we were reproducing at 3.7% per annum. Our death rate had decreased from 12% to 7% which resulted in a natural increase of 3% p.a., a high rate, he noted.

9. Assuming decreasing death rate and also decreasing birth rate, the 3% population growth would likely continue over the next 10 years bringing the population to 13 million in 1977.

10. Dr Lim thought that national income should increase at 3% p.a. over the 1967 per capital (sic) income of USD940 p.a. But at 3% rate of growth the gap between us and the rich countries would widen.

11. Still the other developing countries would be behind us. However at 3% growth we would not be able to create jobs at 100,000 p.a. The rate of growth of national income should be 5%.

12. Investment growth (domestic) would not be able to do this.

13. If foreign investment makes up 4% of growth then it may be possible to achieve the necessary rate of investment for creating 100,000 jobs per annum.

14. It was a time when the rubber estates and tin mines were still owned by foreigners. Bringing in foreign capital sounded like increasing overdependence on foreign enterprise. We did not quite relish the idea of more foreign involvement in our newly independent country.

15. But without capital inflow unemployment would be 200,000 by 1977. Together with 160,000 unemployed in 1967, the rate would go up to 360,000, a horrendous figure.

16. The 360,000 did not include a large number of under-employed workers.

17. In the second five-year plan the public section was to spend 4,500 million Ringgit of which 1,900 million Ringgit was to come from foreign sources (borrowing).

18. Malaysia would have to depend on foreign capital inflow. Dr Lim remarked that political independence had not freed us from dependence on foreign capital. Still, he said, it was consistent with political independence. He named several developed countries which depended on foreign capital inflows.

19. He then turned to the rubber industry which was undergoing great difficulties because of the increasing usage of synthetics. He concluded that the difficulties of the rubber industry was also the difficulty of the nation in view of the strategic and preeminent role the industry occupied in the Malaysian economy.

20. The United States was making things more difficult through the release of their rubber stockpile. I remember being invited by Mr Bell, the American Ambassador to tea and I raised this matter. I was shocked when the Ambassador said that it was important for the US economy to keep rubber prices low. I told him that rubber prices were more critical to a small country like Malaysia than to a huge diversified economic power like America. But he did not care what happened to Malaysia. Yet at that time we looked up to America as a friend and liberator.

21. Rubber prices went down from 108.00 cents per pound to 68.14 cents. At the time Dr Lim wrote his article it was 50 cent per pound. The kampong people suffered grievously.

22. The other major source of income for Malaysia was tin. Already the production was decreasing.

23. We may be surprised but after tin came iron ore. We produced 7.3 million tons in 1963 but the production was going down. We produce no iron ore for export today.

24. Dr Lim predicted that income from rubber, tin and iron ore would decrease by 1977.

25. But the picture was bright for palm oil. In 1957 we exported 58.5 thousand tons of palm oil. By 1966 we exported 178.0 thousand tons.

26. Imagine how small we were then. Today if I am not mistaken we export more than 12 million tons at RM 3,000 plus per ton = 36,000,000,000 i.e. 36 billion Ringgit per year - well over the total public development estimate of 4,000 million Ringgit for the second five year plan (of course the Ringgit bought more than it does now).

27. Other than these we expected to earn something from timber, canned pineapple and pepper.

28. Dr Lim believed that growth would be from the domestic sector, with public sector contributing much towards it.

29. From Dr Lim's paper, presented at a forum organised by the National Union of Malayan Students at the University of Malaya, it did not seem likely that Malaysia would grow to what it is today. Yet Dr Lim was optimistic. He expected political stability to contribute towards Malaysia's development.

30. I write this in order to remind ourselves as to what we were like before. In 1967 no one thought of a Malaysia like what it is today. We did not think of industrialisation. We saw ourselves as a producer of raw materials.

31. Foreign Direct Investment was an unknown term when Dr Lim Chong Eu invited foreign industrialists in the early 70s to invest in the electronic industry on liberal terms. Prior to that we had insisted that all foreign industries must accept Malaysian Equity Participation (before NEP).

32. Only National or Matsushita came. But later we gave priority to job creation to benefit not those with money to invest but the unemployed workers. That was the best decision the Malaysian Government ever made.

33. Today Malaysia is more prosperous than the other countries which attained independence together with us. There is not a single race, not a single person, whatever may be his or her station in life who can honestly say that he or she has gained nothing from the independent Governments of Malaysia.

34. We are all the beneficiaries of the policies of those early people who lead this country. The systems and policies they initiated were excellent. If they seem not to work today it is not because they were bad but it is because we do not have their caliber. We have become very selfish and too materialistic. This country has given us much. Is it still the country we love? I wonder!

Oleh: A Kadir Jasin

HERDIKAN Perdana Menteri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi terhadap media yang berasaskan Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi(ICT) seperti blog, laman perkongsian fail YouTube dan sistem pesanan ringkas (SMS) wajib dipandang berat.

Jelas daripada kenyataan yang dimukahadapankan oleh hampir semua akhbar arus perdana hari ini bahawa Perdana Menteri telah membuat “kerja rumah” atau telah dinasihati oleh pihak-pihak tertentu yang tahu mengenai peranan ICT dalam pembentukan pendapat umum.

Bahasa yang digunakannya boleh dianggap keras dan mengancam. Beliau menggunakan istilah seperti pengkhianatan, perbuatan khianat, pembohongan, “treason” dan “treachery.”

Beliau menuduh pengguna saluran siber ini sebagai tidak menunjuk hormat kepada prinsip-prinsip Rukun Negara.

Katanya segala fitnah dan pembohongan yang disebarkan melalui blogs dan YouTube tidak menyumbang ke arah mewujudkan perasan lega dan keyakinan di kalangan rakyat jelata.

Eloklah kalau Perdana Menteri sendiri kini mengakui secara terbuka di hadapan kakitangan awam mengenai kesan dan implikasi media yang berlandaskan ICT ini terhadap pendapat umum.

Walaupun mungkin ada pihak yang akan melihat kenyataan Abdullah itu sebagai ancaman atau permulaan kepada satu tindakan yang lebih keras, saya melihatnya sebagai sesuatu yang positif.

Kalau pendukung pemerintahan dan jentera mereka mahu mengambil iktibar daripada artikulasi Perdana Menteri itu, mereka akan segera mendalami, memahami dan menangani isu ini.

Pertama, bukan semua blog dan kandungan YouTube berunsur politik. Malah di negara kita, lebih banyak blog berupa blog peribadi yang tidak menyentuh politik.

Kedua, bukan semua blog politik dan kandungan politik YouTube dikendalikan oleh orang politik atau wartawan yang mahir dalam hal ehwal politik.

Dan ketiga, bukan semua blog anti-pemerintah atau dikendalikan oleh pembangkang. Banyak juga blog dimiliki atau dikendalikan oleh ahli politik pemerintah dan penyokong kuatnya.

Mungkin ada blog atau pemblog yang antikerajaan, yang membuat fitnah dan melanggar prinsip-prinsip Rukun Negara. Kalau ini terbukti, tindakan sivil dan jenayah boleh diambil ke atas mereka.

Tetapi pasti ada juga blog yang dikendalikan secara profesional dan rasional walaupun kritikal terhadap pemerintah dan parti pemerintah.

Sedikit sebanyak mereka telah menyumbang ke arah memberi kesedaran dan membantu pemerintah memperbetulkan beberapa kesilapan.

Misalnya, dalam isu penjualan Pantai Holdings Berhad kepada syarikat Singapura, Parkway Holdings Limited. Pada mulanya Perdana Menteri sendiri menafikan di dalam akhbar bahawa ada syarikat tempatan yang jatuh ke tangan asing.

Tetapi, beberapa minggu kemudian beliau mengaku bahawa Pantai Holdings telah jatuh ke tangan asing dan Khazanah Nasional Berhad terpaksa dikerah untuk membeli balik kawalan syarikat itu dengan belanja yang besar.

Begitu juga dalam isu-isu sensasi yang lain seperti pemberian kontrak Petronas di dalam dan luar negara kepada Scomi Berhad dan pembelian aset awam Avenue Capital oleh ECM Libra.

Kalau pemblog boleh disifatkan sebagai tidak menghormati prinsip-prinsip Rukun Negara, pemerintah pun boleh disifatkan demikian di dalam beberapa tindak-tanduknya.

Misalnya, ketika krisis pelantikan Menteri Besar Perlis dan Terengganu selepas pilihan raya umum 8 Mac lalu di mana peranan Istana telah dipertikaikan.

Lagipun, adalah terlalu mudah (simplistic, convenient) menyalahkan portal berita bebas, blog dan YouTube tanpa mengkaji dan memahami mengapa rakyat jelata memilih dan mempercayai mereka.

Salah satu sebab adalah media massa arus perdana tidak menyiarkan berita dan maklumat yang dianggap tidak memihak kepada pemerintah.

Kalau disiarkan pun, berita dan maklumat itu kerap kali diolah semula agar memihak kepada pemerintah atau sekurang-kurangnya tidak memberi kesan negatif kepada pemerintah.

Sama ada benar atau hanya persepsi semata-mata, ramai orang hari ini melayari Internet untuk mendapatkan maklumat dan bertukar-tukar fikiran daripada mengikuti media massa arus perdana.

Oleh sebab media massa arus perdana begitu berkait rapat dengan pemerintahan, maka kredibilitinya dan kredibiliti pemerintah saling kait-mengait.

Sama ada kandungan media Internet penuh pembohongan, fitnah dan konspirasi seperti yang didakwa oleh Perdana Menteri, kebenaran mutakhir bergantung kepada proses undang-undang dan kehakiman yang sedang berjalan sekarang.

Kebenaran mutakhir akan muncul dan pihak-pihak yang tertuduh akan mendapat pengadilan yang saksama hanyalah jika proses penyiasatan, penuduhan, pembelaan dan penghakiman dibenarkan berlaku tanpa sebarang gangguan, campur tangan dan ancaman oleh sesiapa pun.

Sumber: MalaysiaKini.com

Datuk Seri Najib Razak sekali lagi dikaitkan dengan Altantuya Shaariibuu - kali ini dakwaan yang lebih menggemparkan daripada penyiasat persendirian kepada Abdul Razak Abdullah Baginda.

Penyiasat persendirian itu, P Balasubramaniam hadir dalam sidang media bersama Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim di ibu pejabat PKR Petaling Jaya hari ini.

Dalam akuan berkanunnya, Balasubramaniam memberikan beberapa butiran maklumat yang didakwa menunjukkan hubungan awal antara Altantuya, wanita Mongolia yang dibunuh, dengan timbalan perdana menteri.

Balasubramaniam, yang ditahan polis di awal siasatan kes berprofil tinggi itu pada 2006, turut mendakwa keterangannya mengenai Najib telah tidak dimasukkan dalam kenyataan beramarannya.

Dakwaan-dakwaan tersebut terkandung dalam akaunnya setebal 16 halaman - yang turut diedarkan di sidang media tersebut tengah hari ini. Akuan berkanun tersebut difailkan pada 1 Julai.

Balasubramaniam juga mendedahkan bahawa Najib telah memberitahu Abdul Razak bahawa ketua polis negara Tan Sri Musa Hassan akan "menguruskan" kes bunuh yang membabitkan rakan rapatnya itu.

Hantar SMS

Balasubramaniam diupah oleh Abdul Razak selama 10 hari untuk berdepan dengan Altantuya yang datang ke Malaysia dua tahun lalu untuk berurusan dengan penganalisis politik itu, seorang kenalan Najib.

Tidak lama selepas itu, Altantuya ditemui terbunuh di sebuah kawasan terpencil di Shah Alam, Selangor.

Beliau juga mendedahkan bahawa Abdul Razak telah menghantar SMS kepada Najib pada hari beliau ditahan berhubung siasatan pembunuhan Altantuya dan telah menerima jawapan daripada Najib yang menyatakan "beliau telah bercakap dengan ketua polis negara".

Balasubramaniam berkata, dalam jawapannya itu, Najib telah memberitahu Abdul Razak bahawa "perkara itu akan diuruskan oleh ketua polis negara".

Pegawai penyiasat itu juga mendedahkan bahawa beliau telah memberitahu semua itu kepada polis ketika mereka mengambil kenyataannya sepanjang tujuh hari siasatan terhadapnya, tetapi terperanjat kerana semua bahagian yang membabitkan Najib, tidak dimasukkan dalam kenyataan tersebut.

Laporan polis

Balasubramaniam juga memberitahu sidang media tersebut bahawa beliau membangkitkan isu itu sekarang kerana kecewa dengan pihak pendakwaan - yang telah menutup kes pendakwaan terhadap dua anggota polis dan Abdul Razak yang dituduh membunuh Altantuya - kerana tidak berbuat apa-apa untuk mengemukakan keterangannya mengenai Najib.

Katanya, beliau tidak ditanya langsung mengenai perkara itu apabila memberi keterangan di mahkamah. Beliau merupakan saksi pertama pihak pendakwa.

Anwar berkata, ini membuktikan bahawa pihak polis dan pihak pendakwa, terutama Musa dan peguam negara Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, telah menyembungikan maklumat yang relevan dengan kes tersebut.

Ketua umum PKR itu bimbang bahawa mereka akan melakukan perkara yang sama dalam siasatan kes liwat terhadapnya sekarang, ekoran dakwaan bekas pembantunya Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.

Anwar juga telah membuat laporan polis terhadap Musa dan Gani Isnin lalu yang didakwanya memalsukan bukti dalam kes ditumbuk Tan Sri Rahim Noor, ketua polis negara waktu itu, pada 1998.

Timbalan perdana menteri sebelum ini beberapa kali menafikan beliau mengenali wanita Mongolia itu dan juga menafikan sebarang kaitan dengannya.

Anwar: Tubuh s'jaya siasatan diraja

Ketua Umum PKR, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim mendakwa, pendedahan penyiasat persendirian, P Balasubramaniam dalan akuan berkanunnya, mempunyai implikasi serius terhadap pentadbiran kehakiman negara di mana integriti dan kredibiliti polis, pejabat Peguam Negara dan badan kehakiman telah tercemar.

Katanya, kenyataan Balasubramaniam itu telah mengesahkan "apa yang telah kita katakan selama ini; tiada siasatan yang sempurna dilakukan terhadap pembunuhan Altantuya".

Akuan bersumpah Balasubramaniam itu, tegas mantan timbalan perdana menteri itu, mengesahkan dengan jelas dan konsisten bentuk manipulasi sistem keadilan jenayah "yang telah kita saksikan di negara ini sejak 1998".

Akaun berkanun setebal 16 halaman itu difailkan pada 1 Julai dan turut diedarkan di sidang media Anwar di ibu pejabat PKR, Petaling Jaya tengah hari ini. Balasubramaniam turut hadir.

Menurutnya, pendedahan penyiasat persendirian itu menuntut supaya sebuah suruhanjaya diraja ditubuhkan untuk menyiasat dakwaan tersebut.

Dalam akuan berkanunnya itu, Balasubramaniam memberi maklumat yang didakwa menunjukkan hubungan awal antara Altantuya Shaariibuu dengan Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

The AG and IGP fabricated evidence back in 1998 so they must now pay for this crime. No doubt that was ten years ago but the evidence has just surfaced. Yes, that’s right, a whistle-blower has just come forward to reveal the secret that he/she has been keeping for the last ten years.

NO HOLDS BARRED - The AG-IGP tag-team fabricated evidence

By: Raja Petra Kamarudin

Raja Petra Kamarudin signed a false Statutory Declaration. So say the Attorney-General (AG) and Inspector-General of Police (IGP). And, for that, Raja Petra must be sent to jail for two years under Section 203 of the penal Code.

Okay, no problem, I can live with that. But for sure the AG and IGP will be in the next cell of the same block and they shall remain in jail longer than I will. You see; the AG and IGP fabricated evidence ten years ago, back in 1998. And the punishment for this is more than just two years jail. So, while I go in for two years, the AG and IGP will still be in jail long after I have been released and will be sitting in the Havana Club enjoying my Cuban cigar.

Some of you may by now be blur on what I am talking about so allow me to take you for a trip down memory lane. On the night of 20 September 1998, Anwar Ibrahim was arrested and taken to the Bukit Aman lockup. The then IGP, Rahim Noor, entered the lockup soon after that and beat Anwar up. Anwar was blindfolded and handcuffed when Rahim Noor beat him up.

The recently ‘retired’ Commercial Crime Division Director, Ramli Yusof -- who is currently on trial on trumped-up charges of corruption -- rushed into the lockup when he heard Anwar screaming in pain. He grabbed Rahim Noor and pulled him away to stop him from continuing to assault Anwar.

They then left the lockup with Anwar lying unconscious on the lockup floor, covered in blood and still blindfolded and handcuffed. Ramli suggested that they send Anwar to the hospital but Rahim Noor refused. Instead, Rahim Noor asked them to detain Anwar under the Internal Security Act so that no one can meet him for the next 60 days -- and therefore find out that Anwar had been beaten up.

The next morning, Ramli went to check on Anwar and he found the latter still unconscious and exactly where they had left him the night before -- bloody, blindfolded and handcuffed. Ramli again tried seeking Rahim Noor’s approval to send Anwar to hospital but his plea was declined. Ramli then asked for a doctor to come to Bukit Aman to attend to Anwar.

At first the police said that Anwar had beaten himself up. He not only beat himself up but he continued beating himself even after he had become unconscious. This is the special quality of Anwar who can remain conscious after becoming unconscious compared to Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who is always unconscious whenever he is conscious.

When the government realised that only 1% of Malaysians believed that Anwar beat himself up -- and continued beating himself up after he became unconscious -- they had no choice but to order an investigation. And the investigation confirmed that Rahim Noor had beaten up Anwar and that other senior police officers were also present to witness the beating.

Nevertheless, in spite of everyone in Bukit Aman having knowledge of what happened, the current AG and IGP -- who were both in Bukit Aman at that time and were fully aware that Rahim Noor had beaten Anwar -- fabricated a report that said Anwar was beaten up by a person or persons unknown. Later, of course, Rahim Noor confessed to the crime when he realised he can no longer cover up his evil deed and was sentenced to a mere two months jail, the same jail term for someone who steals a banana. (They let him out after only 40 days).

The AG and IGP fabricated evidence back in 1998 so they must now pay for this crime. No doubt that was ten years ago but the evidence has just surfaced. Yes, that’s right, a whistleblower has just come forward to reveal the secret that he/she has been keeping for the last ten years.

Well, as I said in my 18 June 2008 Statutory Declaration: “I have been reliably informed”. Take note of this new phase my friends from the legal fraternity: I have been reliably informed. And I have been reliably informed that the AG and IGP fabricated evidence back in 1998.

God, does this Havana cigar taste good…..puff…….

I, Anwar bin Ibrahim, (NRIC No: 470810-07-5095), hereby make the following police report based on information that I have recently received.

1. This report is in relation to the investigation into the assault on me by the former IGP Tan Sri Rahim Noor on 20 September 1998. I believe Tan Sri Rahim Noor, after being prosecuted, pleaded guilty to the assault. I had lodged a police report in respect of the assault on 27.9.98.

2. In relation to the investigation into the assault, I believe that the Investigating Officer ACP Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (now Datuk Mat Zain) had conducted a thorough investigation and prepared an investigation paper (“IP”) which was presented by October 1998 to the former Attorney General, Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah and his team which included the current Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail for further action.

3. The said investigation paper concluded that Tan Sri Rahim Noor was the perpetrator of the assault on me. The said paper reached a conclusion after a thorough investigation which included medical reports by Hospital KL forensic specialists such as Dr. Ab. Halim Haji Mansar and Dr.Zahari bin Noor and statement from at least 60 witnesses. The medical reports concluded that the injury inflicted on me was consistent with an assault.

4. Despite the contents of the Investigation paper and the medical reports already available, Tan Sri Mokhtar with the assistance of the current Attorney General, Tan Sri Gani Patail then obtained the services of another doctor whom I was informed to be one Dr. Abdul Rahman Yusof.

5. Doctor Rahman in an undated and second report speaks of a “reconstruction of the scene” on 14 December 1998. I believe that this so-called reconstruction of the scene never happened.

6. It is an undisputable fact that Dr. Rahman’s reports in relation to the assault on me were done without actually even examining me at any time.

7. However, despite the IP and the already existing medical reports, Tan Sri Mokhtar in his press statement of 5 January 1999 appears to accept the views of Dr. Rahman on the so-called “inconsistencies” in the other medical reports by the doctors who actually physically examined me.

8. Tan Sri Mokhtar’s press statement also states that the investigation which had been carried out did not identify the person or persons responsible for my injuries. This is inconsistent with the IP which had already concluded by October 1998 that it was Rahim Noor who assaulted me. Tan Sri Mokhtar and his team therefore had willfully misled the public. As the police investigation done by Mat Zain had apparently not led to any conclusion, there was a public outcry and demand for a Royal Commission which was then set up. Tan Sri Mokhtar also made a false statement that the IP was submitted to him on 19.11.98. I believe that Tan Sri Gani Patail had full knowledge of the false contents of this press statement.

9. I believe Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Tan Sri Gani Patail were present in Bukit Aman on 20 September 1998 and knew about the assault by Tan Sri Rahim Noor on me. Tan Sri Musa and Tan Sri Gani further concealed the fact of the assault on me from the public until my black eye and injuries were revealed in court.

10. I believe both Tan Sri Musa and Tan Sri Gani Patail were actively involved in the procuring of the second undated report by Dr. Rahman which makes false and incredible conclusions such as “the pattern and nature of the injuries are not consistent with a direct blow”, “accidental nature of the injuries could not be ruled out” and “self-inflicted nature of the injury should be considered”. They gave the instructions to Dr. Rahman to proceed to write this second report and were acting under the direction and/or jointly with Tan Sri Mokhtar Abdullah.

11. These facts show that Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Tan Sri Gani Patail and SAC II Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim (who, according to Dr. Rahman’s second report, accompanied him to the cell in Bukit Aman where I was detained and participated in the so-called reconstruction of the scene) conspired with Dr. Rahman to procure the production of this second report. This was done so that my police report of 27.9.98 in respect of the assault would be regarded as a false police report for which I could be charged, or at the very least, to damage my credibility, so as to affect my defence in the other criminal cases where I was charged for so-called “corruption” and sodomy to facilitate a conviction.

12. I wish to point out that Tan Sri Gani Patail was the senior prosecutor assisting Tan Sri Mokhtar in the prosecution against me. Tan Sri Musa Hassan was the Investigating Officer for my prosecution. I also believe, that in an unprecedented manner, an operation room specially for my prosecution was set up at Bukit Aman’s compound where all these individuals would meet regularly.

13. This is not the first time that allegations of fabricating evidence had surfaced in connection with Tan Sri Gani Patail. I am informed that in the Federal Court decision Zainur bin Zakaria v Public Prosecutor [2001] 3 MLJ, Steve Shim CJ in delivering his judgment pointed out that “… was he not justified, on a prima facie basis, in complaining that Tan Sri Gani Patail’s conduct at the meeting on 2.10.1998 was an attempt to get Nalla to fabricate evidence in order to perfect charges against him for other alleged sexual offences?” The references to “he” and “him” in that sentence are references to myself.

14. In relation to the above, I refer to the following documents which will be of assistance to the police:

a. The press statement by Tan Sri Mokhtar issued on 5.1.99.
b. The notes of proceedings in the report of the Royal Commission of the evidence of Dr. Rahman
c. The second undated report produced by Dr. Rahman exhibited in the Royal Commission report.

15. I call for a fresh investigation into the fabrication of evidence in this case which I am advised is an offence contrary to section 192 of the Penal Code punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. I ask that all the persons who are implicated in the procuring of this second report by Dr. Rahman i.e. Tan Sri Gani Patail, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Dr. Rahman and Datuk Mat Zain bin Ibrahim be investigated thoroughly so that the truth is known and the offending individuals punished.
.
ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM
1st July 2008

ADDENDUMS

PETALING JAYA: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dismissed the sodomy accusation, saying he has a strong alibi to prove his innocence.

“I have ample proof and witnesses,” he said at a packed press conference at the PKR headquarters here yesterday.

Anwar was silent for a few seconds, then took another question, before replying to a question on his whereabouts on Thursday night last week when his 23-year-old former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan alleged that he had been sodomised by Anwar.

The PKR de facto leader declined to elaborate on the matter, saying he had been advised by his lawyers to refrain from doing so.

Compared to the first time when he was charged with committing sodomy in 1993, Anwar said he was well prepared with facts and documents now.

“Back then, the police stole my diary and never returned it. We struggled to think of what happened years ago. This time, events are still fresh in my memory. There is the diary and witnesses.

“No way am I going to give them an easy route this time. I will fight them hard and effectively, because it is the second round of dirty conspiracy,” said Anwar.

He also alleged that a prominent leader and two other people close to the politician were part of a three-person team behind the sodomy allegation.

“I don’t blame the accuser. I blame the conspirators in this game for using people as pawns,” he said.

Anwar said there was a statutory declaration which he would reveal in due time, stating the politician and the other two people had held secret meetings with Mohd Saiful.

“This person, supposed to be my staff, working for me, but having secret meetings with them, aneh sekali...(very strange),” Anwar said.

To another question, Anwar believed the sodomy accusation was re-used 10 years later because “they think this is the best (way) to cause anxiety and disgust among Muslims.”

He called on the police not to spring a surprise arrest, adding his lawyers had written three letters to the Inspector General of Police and the Attorney-General indicating his willingness to co-operate in the investigation.

“They did not reply until today. Take my DNA, take my hair ... my hair is everywhere, except this part,” said Anwar as he smiled and patted the middle part of his scalp.

Asked if he would lodge a police report on the “death threats” he received, Anwar replied, “Let’s see how they investigate my report about the fabrication of evidence lodged against the IGP and the AG.”

He also mentioned a former Chief Justice and a Federal Court Judge had apologised to him for the cases involving him in 1998 and 1999.

He urged them to have the courage to publicly state their case.

On his two-day stay at the Turkish Embassy, Anwar lambasted the Government for creating an issue over whether he was invited.

“Anyone in the right mind will know it is not possible for me to enter the Turkish Embassy without permission in this high-profile case,” he said.

In Shah Alam, Anwar lodged a police report alleging abuse of power by Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail regarding his infamous “black eye” case.

He spent about 35 minutes lodging the report at the Selangor police headquarters yesterday afternoon. He left without speaking to reporters.

Selangor police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar confirmed Anwar had lodged a report against Musa and Abdul Gani.

It is learnt police have forwarded the report to the Anti-Corruption Agency to investigate as the report was on alleged abuse of power which came under the purview of the ACA.

A large group of PKR supporters were prevented from entering the police headquarters.

The supporters became agitated, shouted slogans and pushed the main gate as 60 policemen stood behind it together with a small team of light strike force.

Oleh: A. Kadir Jasin

NEGARA kita Malaysia tidak syak lagi adalah antara negara di dunia yang mempunyai suasana politik yang paling cergas, kompleks dan sensasi.

Bercakaplah dengan mana-mana diplomat, pelabur, penyelidik dan wartawan asing mereka pasti mengakui hakikat ini.

Ada yang mengatakan ini merugikan dan tidak kurang pula berkata ia adalah contoh demokrasi yang sihat.

Apa pun kebenarannya, hakikat bahawa Malaysia berdiri teguh sebagai salah sebuah negara bekas tanah jajahan yang paling berjaya adalah hasil daripada suasana ini.

Tentunyalah dalam suasana politik yang cergas, kompleks dan sensasi ini wujud aspek-aspek yang kurang sihat dan kurang produktif. Justeru itu ada yang mengatakan kita menghabiskan terlalu banyak masa berpolitik.

Antara ciri yang kurang sihat itu, pada pendapat sesetengah pihak, adalah keterdedahan politik kita kepada teori konspirasi (conspiracy theory) atau teori persekongkolan.

Teori konspirasi ditakrifkan sebagai teori yang diajukan untuk menerangkan sesuatu kes atau perkara sebagai satu plot atau percubaan oleh kumpulan atau pakatan sulit.

(A theory seeking to explain a disputed case or matter as a plot by a secret group or alliance rather than an individual or isolated act.)

Maka tidak hairanlah jika wujud begitu banyak teori konspirasi mengenai pelbagai kejadian dan perkembangan semasa yang sedang berlaku dalam arena politik Malaysia.

Yang terbaru dan paling sensasi adalah mengenai Surat Akuan Bersumpah (Statutory Declaration) Raja Petra Kamaruddin dan aduan liwat terhadap Anwar Ibrahim.

Dalam ketaasuban membentuk dan mempopularkan teori persekongkolan ini, fakta dan realiti sering dilupakan atau sengaja diketepikan. Yang menjadi pertimbangan bukan isu pokok tetapi siapa yang terbabit menggembar-gemburkannya.

Antara teori konspirasi yang popular mengenai dua kes ini adalah:-

1. RPK tidak bertindak berseorangan. Dia bersekongkol dengan individu atau kumpulan tertentu. Matlamatnya adalah untuk menjatuhkan atau setidak-tidaknya menyekat kemaraan Mohd Najib Abdul Razak;

2. Mohd Saiful Bukhari b Azlan tidak bertindak berseorangan. Dia bersekongkol dengan individu atau kumpulan tertentu. Matlamatnya adalah untuk menjatuhkan atau setidak-tidaknya menyekat kemaraan Anwar; dan

3. Bahawa semua ini sengaja diada-adakan bagi menutup kelemahan kerajaan dalam menangani kenaikan kos sara hidup dan kegagalan Anwar memujuk Ahli Parlimen Barisan Nasional berpaling tadah.

Dalam kes surat akuan bersumpah RPK, antara pihak yang didakwa berpakat adalah Anwar atau kumpulannya kerana RPK adalah antara penyokong Anwar yang paling lantang ketika gerakan Reformasi tahun 1999.

Teori ini berlandaskan hujah bahawa musuh politik utama Anwar bukanlah Abdullah Ahmad Badawi tetapi Mohd Najib. Jadi, menjatuhkan Mohd Najib adalah antara matlamat utama Anwar dalam usahanya untuk kembali berkuasa.

Mengapa tidak Abdullah sedangkan dialah Perdana Menteri dan Presiden Umno?

Pertama Anwar jarang sekali menyerang Abdullah secara peribadi. Kedua Anwar menganggap Abdullah sebagai sudah berada di pintu keluar bagi kedua-dua jawatan itu.

Ketiga Anwar mempunyai perasaan kasihan terhadap Abdullah sebagai orang senegeri (Pulau Pinang). Keempat dia berasa terhutang budi kepada Abdullah kerana pembebasannya daripada penjara dan tuduhan liwat berlaku sebaik sahaja Abdullah menjadi Perdana Menteri.

Dan kelima kerana Abdullah dan menantunya, Khairy Jamaluddin, telah memudahkan pemergiannya ke luar negara (Jerman) untuk rawatan perubatan sebaik sahaja dibebaskan pada tahun 2004.

Hakikat bahawa RPK mungkin memperjuangkan kebenaran dan keadilan nampaknya tidak begitu penting kepada pencipta teori konspirasi ini. Yang penting adalah implikasi politik akuan bersumpah beliau terhadap Mohd Najib.

Malah lebih sensasi daripada itu adalah hakikat bahawa para pencipta teori konspirasi tidak menolak kemungkinan berlaku persekongkolan antara RPK dengan Kem Abdullah.

Ini adalah kerana Mohd Najib dilihat sebagai pencabar paling berwibawa kepada Abdullah untuk jawatan Presiden Umno dan Perdana Menteri.

Mohd Najib, walaupun nampak tidak yakin dan sering berdolak-dalik mengenai kesetiaannya kepada Abdullah, sebenarnya berada di ambang pintu untuk mengumumkan kesediaannya bertanding jawatan Presiden Umno Disember ini.

Hakikat bahawa RPK adalah pengkritik utama dan paling keras Pentadbiran Abdullah melalui portal berita Malaysia-Todaynya tidak diambil endah oleh para pencipta teori konspirasi.

Malah ada yang mengatakan ini adalah cara PRK berlaku adil kepada semua pihak. Ada pemerhati melihat RPK sebagai jelmaan atau gabungan antara seorang pejuang kebenaran dan keadilan dengan seorang anarkis (anarchist) yang matlamatnya memporak-perandakan keadaan.

Semua pihak yang didakwa oleh RPK dalam Surat Akuan Bersumpahnya telah menafikan pembabitan mereka. Dua daripada mereka iaitu pasangan suami isteri Lt. Kol. Abdul Aziz Bin Buyong dan Lt. Kol. Norhayati Hassan telah mengemukakan saman malu ke atas beliau manakala Rosmah Mansor, isteri Mohd Najib, telah menafikannya dalam kenyataan kepada polis.

Promoter teori konspirasi mengenai tuduhan liwat terhadap Anwar pula melihatnya sebagai ada ubi ada batas, ada hari boleh balas.

Mereka menggunakan maklumat domain awam seperti laporan blog, gambar dan cakap-cakap kedai kopi untuk mengemukakan teori bahawa laporan liwat itu ada kaitan dengan Mohd Najib atau pihak-pihak yang bersangkutan dengannya.

Ia dilihat sebagai tindak balas kepada Surat Akuan Bersumpah RPK.

Bagi mereka, gambar-gambar blog yang menunjukkan Saiful Bukhari beraksi di ruang legar Pejabat TPM dengan bertemankan pegawai khas Mohd Najib yang dikenali sebagai Khairil Anas adalah “gospel truth” – kebenaran mutlak – bahawa sesuatu yang rahsia telah berlaku.

Mengapa tidak? Adalah luar biasa bagi seorang pemuda kacak yang nampak begitu intim dengan para pembesar Umno tiba-tiba menjadi pembantu khas Anwar ketika pilihan raya umum lalu.

Bunyi seakan-akan plot dan watak dalam novel-novel perisikan dan konspirasi John le Carré (aka David John Moore Cornwell).

Antara soalan yang perlu dijawab di arena politik, kepolisan dan kehakiman untuk mematikan pelbagai teori konspirasi ini adalah:

1. Adakah pihak-pihak tertentu di Pejabat Abdullah, Pejabat Mohd Najib, Umno, PDRM dan Kamar Peguam Negara mempunyai maklumat awal sebelum Saiful Bukhari membuat laporan polis?;

2. Apakah kaitan antara Saiful Bukhari dengan Khairil Anas sekadar bergambar kenang-kenangan di ruang legar Pejabat Timbalan Perdana Menteri?;

3. Bagaimana seorang muda berusia 23 tahun dan berupa pemimpin pelajar Universiti Tenaga Nasional merelakan dirinya dicabul berulang kali sebelum membuat laporan polis?;

4. Apakah relevannya tarikh-tarikh tertentu dalam time-line dakwaan liwat itu serta individu-individu yang dikatakan terbabit? (Dalam proses siasatan, Saiful Bukhari pasti akan disoal mengenai siapa yang ditemuinya sebelum dan selepas membuat laporan itu.); dan

5. Adakah peranan beberapa nama yang turut disebut-sebut sebagai “the players” dalam drama ini seperti Ezam, Rohaimi dan Khairil?

Memecah dan menafikan teori-teori konspirasi ini adalah penting bagi mempertahankan kewibawaan dan integriti apa jua tindakan undang-undang yang akan diambil berkaitan akuan bersumpah PKR dan laporan liwat terhadap Anwar.

Bukan tugas mahkamah mengadili teori konspirasi atau apa jua teori. Tugas mahkamah adalah mengadili sama ada apa yang didakwa itu berlaku “tanpa sebarang keraguan” atau tidak.