
Wong Chin Huat is a political scientist by training and a journalism lecturer by trade. He strongly believes that Parliament and legislatures should be confined to homo sapiens and no amphibian should be allowed entry.

Wong Chin Huat is a political scientist by training and a journalism lecturer by trade. He strongly believes that Parliament and legislatures should be confined to homo sapiens and no amphibian should be allowed entry.

This trial, like the first trial of Anwar Ibrahim, is a disgrace to Malaysia a country that aspires to democratic norms, where parties change power peacefully and political opponents are not persecuted by organs of the state. Perverting the legal system for political ends by charging Anwar with sexual offences is an affront to human rights.
Michael Danby
Tonight, I want to speak out on behalf of fellow democrats around Asia, who are flabbergasted at events unfolding in Kuala Lumpur. I refer to the trial which began today of the Malaysian Opposition Leader, Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim. For the second time, the Malaysian leader of the Opposition, Anwar Ibrahim is on trial for what they call in ancient grating English, ‘Sodomy’. For the second time, the Malaysian legal system is being manipulated by supporters of the incumbent government to drive Malaysia’s best known leader Anwar Ibrahim out of national politics. For the second time, documents are being forged, witnesses are being coerced, evidence is being fabricated.
This trial, like the first trial of Anwar Ibrahim, is a disgrace to Malaysia a country that aspires to democratic norms, where parties change power peacefully and political opponents are not persecuted by organs of the state. Perverting the legal system for political ends by charging Anwar with sexual offences is an affront to human rights. In the first place, the offences with which Anwar has been charged that should not be on the statute book. Australia abolished its laws punishing consenting adult homosexual acts decades ago, as did most advanced countries. It’s long past time that Malaysia also repealed these laws, which it inherited from British colonial times. If these laws did not exist, they could not be used for political purposes as we are currently seeing.
In the second place, everyone in Malaysia, and everyone in the international legal community, knows that Anwar is innocent of these charges. This week the Wall Street Journal published a first-hand account of how the Malaysian Special Branch police fabricated the charges that led to Anwar’s first trial in 1998. Munawar Anees recalled how he had been starved and beaten into signing a false confession which implicated Anwar. Now it’s happening again. These are the lengths to which the corrupt elements within the Malaysian ruling party are willing to go to frame Anwar and remove his threat to their power.
Malaysia is a long-time friend and ally of Australia. Over the past 40 years Malaysia has become an increasingly prosperous and successful multi-cultural society. We continue our friendly and mutually beneficial relationship with Malaysia, which is a deep economic, strategic and cultural relationship.
But Malaysia is also a country of 28 million people who have lived ever since independence more than 50 years ago under the rule of the same party, the United Malay National Organisation or UMNO. UMNO has stayed in power by playing on the Malay fears of the Chinese and Indian minorities. So long as Malaysian politics were polarised even subtlety along racial lines, so long as the Malays voted loyally for UMNO, then the self-perpetuating UMNO oligarchy, who have grown rich through long years of power and through their cozy links to business, would be safe.
That’s why Anwar Ibrahim is such a threat. For the first time Malaysia has a charismatic Malay opposition politician able to appeal to Malay voters and pose a real threat to UMNO’s hold on power. At the 2008 elections Anwar’s People’s Justice Party and its allies won 60 seats away from UMNO and its allies, creating a viable two-party system for the first time. As a result, Abdullah Badawi was deposed as Prime Minister and replaced by Najib Razak, but the threat from Anwar’s coalition continues to grow. So even though the first attempt to frame Anwar on these spurious charged had failed, the corrupt forces within UMNO have decided to try again.
I recently had the privilege of meeting Anwar Ibrahim when he was in Melbourne for the Parliament of the World’s Religions in December. He is an intelligent and articulate and passionate democrat. He is committed to a thorough reform of Malaysian government, to rid it of the cronyism, corruption and authoritarian tendencies that have gained ground since Mahathir Mohammed became Prime Minister in 1981. He is a great, although not uncritical, friend and admirer of Australia. If he were to become Malaysia’s Prime Minister our relationship with Malaysia would become even stronger.
I am pleased that in the last few hours the judge has suspended the case against Anwar for a day. I hope Prime Minister Najib and his ministers are not involved. The best way for them to prove that they are not is to intervene and have these charges withdrawn, and those responsible for fabricating them punished. Malaysia is a great country, and an emerging power in our region. It can do without the embarrassment that these disgraceful proceedings are undermining its newly won democratic credibility.

Scared by the global financial crisis and uncertain politics after the 2008 election, foreign investors withdrew US$35 billion (RM119 billon) between Q2 2008 and Q2 2009.
Foreign ownership of Malaysia’s stock market stood at 20.8 per cent at the end of 2009, according to data from Bursa Malaysia, less than the 21 per cent in March before Najib took over the failing leadership of the National Front coalition.
Read more here What’s at stake in trial of Malaysia’s Anwar?


By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 19 — Lim Kit Siang t
oday urged Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail to begin contempt proceedings against Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz (picture) for attacking “the independence, impartiality, integrity and professionalism” of Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Datuk Lau Bee Lan.
“Nazri launched a most improper, unwarranted and unprecedented attack on Lau, not only saying that her Dec 31 decision was wrong, but [he was] also maligning and besmirching her judicial competence and role by declaring that she is not a Muslim and had improperly ruled over a matter that concerned the ‘akidah’ (faith) of the Muslim community.

“This is the first time that I know of a judge being attacked on the ground of her religious credentials
rather than her judicial competence and temper — and coming from the de facto Law Minister, it must
be regarded most seriously as a totally unacceptable attack on the independence, impartiality, integrity and professionalism of the judiciary,” Lim (picture) said in a press statement.
The High Court had on Dec 31 last year ruled that the Catholic Church’s Herald weekly had the constitutional right to publish the word “Allah” in its publication, to cater to its Bahasa Malaysia-speaking followers.
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s department and de facto Law Minister questioned Lau’s “Allah” decision because she was not a Muslim and therefore did not understand the “Malay psyche.”
Nazri also stressed that Muslims are constitutionally Malays and the two cannot be separated.
“You must study the psyche of the Malays. The Chinese can be Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, no problem, but the Malays, the race itself is defined in the Constitution.
“Who is Malay? In the Constitution, [a] Malay is one: a Muslim; two: speaks Malay; and three: practises Malay culture. In the Constitution, there can’t be [a] Malay who is not a Muslim. Anything at all, any suspicion will confuse the ordinary Malays. They become so protective because Malay and Islam cannot be separate,” Nazri told reporters yesterday.
The DAP advisor, however, rejected Nazri’s claims as a “dangerous perversion and subversion of the Constitution.”
“What is Nazri trying to say? Is he laying down a new law that in multi-religious and multi-racial Malaysia where the Constitution recognises Islam as the official religion but guarantees freedom of religion for all other faiths, non-Muslim and non-Malay judges must be excluded from adjudicating certain cases like the Herald ‘Allah’ case allegedly because it concerns the ‘akidah’ of the Muslim community, and the Malay psyche?
“Fifty-two years after Merdeka and 46 years after the formation of Malaysia, is the country going backwards with a further dichotomy of the judicial system where there is [a] new division of cases which is to be adjudicated solely by judges who fulfil the two conditions of being Muslim and Malay because they fall into the category of [the] ‘akidah’ of the Muslim community and the Malay psyche?
“Will the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court — should the appeal on the Herald’s “Allah” case reach that level — be constituted solely with Muslim and Malay judges to take into account Nazri’s extraordinary objections?” Lim asked.