Share |

Friday, October 31, 2014

辩方完成肛交案陈词 安华强调应判无罪

Passing the baton for awareness on human trafficking

Ahmad Shabery: People still have faith in the judiciary

Jihadist sought crowds to boost bomb deaths

Investigators have begun to carefully probe the background of Austria's latest radicalized teenage jihadist, whose pre-detention was extended on Wednesday afternoon after a court hearing in St. Pölten in Lower Austria.

The Local

The 14-year-old boy of Turkish origin had admitted to planning a bombing of Westbahnhof, one of Austria's busiest and largest railway stations, and had begun making enquiries into obtaining necessary parts for a bomb when police arrested him on Tuesday afternoon.

On Wednesday evening, there were media reports that as part of the radicalization process, young people had been lured into jihadism through promises that they could receive up to $25,000 (€19,800) for an assassination.

Now police and prosecutors are examining the computer, phone and other aspects of the suspect's life, including acquaintances and possible backers of the young would-be jihadist. The data analysis is expected to take days, or even weeks, according to the police.

The Regional Court in St. Pölten agreed with prosecutors that there was a flight risk with the boy, and decided to impose pre-trial detention. The teenager was "strongly suspected to have been involved in a terrorist group," it said in a press release.

Police have been investigating the young man since the beginning of October, when it was learned that he had been making increasingly radical statements that supported the Isis terrorist network, and had begun the process to acquire bomb parts.

According to one report, the boy has admitted that he had been considering locations where crowds gathered to maximize the impact of a bomb, which is why Westbahnhof was one of his targets.

Human Rights Defender in Sudan without Home, Country after Muslim Extremist Attack

Convert from Islam flees Darfur after trying to exercise right to free speech.

By Morning Star News

NAIROBI, Kenya (Morning Star News) – A Sudanese father of two who once worked as a human rights defender now lives in a refugee camp after surviving an attempt on his life by Islamic extremists.

Before Ibrahim Ismaeil Ibrahim, 34, left Islam and dared to criticize the religion, he worked as a writer and human rights defender in Darfur Region’s state of West Darfur for the Sudan Contemporary Center for Studies and Development. As he chronicled human rights violations by Islamic extremists, he became disillusioned with the religion and put his faith in Jesus Christ, he said.

“I defected from Islam and started writing articles through my [pseudonymous] page on Facebook, in which I described Islam as a religion of terror and killing,” he said. “Then some people discovered my identity and sent me messages of intimidation on my phone that they were looking for my head. Suddenly, I was attacked.”

At his home in the West Darfur capital of Geneina in January 2013, Ibrahim, his wife and two young children were unhurt in the late-night attack by what he believes was one of the Islamic extremists threatening him.

“An unknown Islamic extremist broke into my house at midnight and opened fire on my room,” Ibrahim told Morning Star News. “I managed to flee Geneina.”

His employer contacted Front Line Defenders, an organization dedicated to assisting human rights defenders, especially those in danger; the group provided him funds for an airline ticket to Cairo, Egypt from Khartoum and accommodation for three months, he said.

From Cairo he moved to Kampala, Uganda, and eventually he went to South Sudan. There he learned from his family in Geneina that the threat to their lives was growing stronger, and he made arrangements for them to flee to Chad.

Ibrahim also learned that, with help from the government of Sudan, he was being monitored by Muslim extremists connected to those who had planned to assassinate him. He had left his ID card when he fled Geneina, and the assailants had provided it to a Sudanese government security agent, he said.

He rejoined his wife, 7-year-old son and 5-year-old daughter in Chad. Eventually the reunited family traveled to another country in Africa, undisclosed for security reasons, where they live as refugees at a U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees camp.

“Ibrahim, a brave young father, and his family have been through a hard time and suffering as they become refugees away from home because of persecution by the Muslim government of Khartoum through Muslim extremists,” a Christian source told Morning Star News.

The source, who requested anonymity for security reasons, added that the Christian family is an inspiration to other refugees from Darfur, where thousands of civilians have been killed amid conflict between Arab militias battling non-Arab rebels.

“I believe the Lord will work through Ibrahim and his family, and that they will be a blessing to many of their communities and families who live with them from Darfur,” the Christian source said. “Many of our Sudanese brothers and sisters who have been victims of war and religious persecution are desperately in need of the mercy of the Father through Jesus Christ, because all that they have seen is complete agony and devastation in the Muslim world.”

Following South Sudan’s split from Sudan in a 2011 referendum, the government in late 2012 began ridding the country of Christianity. It has bulldozed several church buildings, closed others and deported South Sudanese who have live most if not all of their lives in Sudan, as well as many foreigners. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has said post-secession Sudan will adhere more exclusively to Islam and Arabic culture.

On June 30 bulldozers demolished the Sudanese Church of Christ in the Thiba Al Hamyida area of North Khartoum as church members watched, with security personnel threatening to arrest them if they tried to block their efforts, church members said. On Feb. 17, bulldozers accompanied by local police and security personnel destroyed the Sudanese Church of Christ building in the Ombada area of Omdurman, across the River Nile from Khartoum, without any advance notice.

Officials gave no reason for the demolition except that, as it was located in a “Muslim area,” the 300-member church was not wanted there, a church member said. Another source, a church leader, confirmed to Morning Star News that authorities destroyed the building and confiscated the land without warning. The orders came from the Ombada locality, or city council, sources said.

Besides raiding Christian bookstores and arresting Christians, authorities threatened to kill South Sudanese Christians who do not leave or cooperate with them in their effort to find other Christians (see Morning Star News).

Due to its treatment of Christians and other human rights violations, Sudan has been designated a Country of Particular Concern by the U.S. State Department since 1999, and in April 2013, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommended the country remain on the list.

Ibrahim, the source said, deeply loves Sudan and has supported those oppressed under the regime of Bashir, especially Christians who have been tortured.

“He has dedicated himself to bringing awareness to the free world to get engaged in their plight,” he said. “Let us all keep praying for Ibrahim’s family, that their situation will get better.”

If you or your organization would like to help enable Morning Star News to continue raising awareness of persecuted Christians worldwide with original-content reporting, please consider collaborating at

Civil court cannot annul religious court’s order as both are of equal status, says government lawyer

M. Indira Gandhi, seen here with two of her older children, was granted a custody order by the High Court but has not been able to get back her youngest daughter. – The Malaysian Insider file pic, October 30, 2014.
The High Court was wrong to issue a mandamus order to the Inspector-General of Police to arrest a Muslim convert and return his daughter to his ex-wife in a custody case as the Federal Constitution does not allow the civil court to interfere in the affairs of the religious court, a government lawyer said today.

Senior Federal Counsel Noor Hisham Ismail told the Court of Appeal that the High Court could not annul an order of a Shariah Court due to an amendment to the Federal Constitution in 1988.

"Parliament made amendments to avoid the civil court interfering in the affairs of the Shariah court," he said in his submissions to set aside the order given by High Court judge Lee Swee Seng.

He said both courts have exclusive jurisdiction and one was not superior to the other.

In 2009, the religious court in Ipoh had granted Muhammad Ridhuan Abdullah, who was formerly known as K. Pathmanathan, the custody of his three children, Tevin Darsiny, 17, Karan Dinish, 16, and Prasana, 6, after he unilaterally converted them to Islam.

The following year, the High Court in Ipoh granted kindertgarten teacher M. Indira Gandhi full custody of all three children and Ridhuan was ordered to return Prasana Diksa to Indira.

On May 30 this year, the Ipoh High Court cited Ridhuan for contempt and issued a warrant of arrest against him after he repeatedly failed to hand over Prasana Diksa to Indira.

Indira had also obtained a recovery order from the High Court to compel the police to locate Ridhuan.

The failure of the police to act resulted in her filing for a judicial review seeking the mandamus order, as IGP Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar was insistent that police would take the middle path in cases where disputing parties had obtained separate orders from the civil and Shariah courts.

On September 12, the High Court allowed a judicial review by Indira for a mandamus order to force Khalid to arrest Ridhuan and return Prasana Diksa to her.

Khalid then obtained a stay order from the Court of Appeal on September 25.

His appeal against Lee's order was heard today before a three-man bench chaired by Datuk Abdul Rahim Abdul Aziz.

Hisham said since the Shariah Court had issued a custody order, the judge was also wrong in granting a recovery order to compel the police to locate and return the child to the mother.

However, he said the Police Act imposed a duty on the IGP to perform his function as prescribed under the law.

He said it was only a perception that non-Muslims were barred from seeking justice in the Shariah Court.

Indira’s lawyer Aston Paiva said she was a blameless person and used the court to seek a remedy to end her predictment.

"It is the husband who had gone into hiding and the mother never saw the daughter despite a High Court order in 2010," he said.

Paiva, who was assisted by M. Kula Segaran and N. Selvam, said it was wrong of Hisham to claim that a civil court could not make the mandamus order.

"The husband's defence is that he has a Shariah Court order and will not respect the High Court order to return the child," he said.

Paiva said the couple were married under civil law and their divorce and other relief like maintenance and division of property should be decided by the High Court.

"The husband's conversion to Islam does not affect the civil marriage unless decided by the civil court," he said.

He said the High Court in Ipoh intervened because the Shariah Court had exceeded its authority.

"A civil court can invalidate a Shariah Court order and this has been done many times in the past," he added.

Paiva said Indira's remedy was in the civil court because a non-Muslim spouse could not go to the Shariah Court as that forum was for persons professing the religion of Islam.

He said Khalid had ignored the High Court and made his own interpretation not to enforce the orders.

"He should have gone back to the civil court to ask for directive by making the necessary applications which he did not do," he said.

Paiva said the Shariah Court had no jurisdiction over the police as it was not a person professing the Islamic religion and as such, Khalid was not bound by a religious court order.

"Artice 121 (1A) was crafted to avoid conflict of jurisdiction and not to oust the supervisory power of the civil court," he added.

He also said there would be a state of lawlessness if the order of mandamus was not granted as it meant a civil servant could ignore the civil court.

"Public confidence in the judiciary will erode because the court can say anything it wants but orders will not be executed," he said.

Paiva said Indira would never be able to see her daughter whom she last saw when the child was 11 months old.

Lawyer Philip Koh Tong Ngee, who represented the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism, told the bench as a friend of the court that Khalid was bound to enforce the Police and Child Acts as they were federal laws.

He said the religious court was constituted under state law.

"Article 75 of the constitution stated that when there is inconsistency between federal and state law, the former shall prevail," he added.

The appellate court reserved judgment. – October 30, 2014.

If Dr M sanctions Bible-burning, God save this country, says Masing

Outspoken Sarawak minister Tan Sri Dr James Masing called for divine help after learning that former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad endorsed Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali’s Bible-burning call. – The Malaysian Insider pic, October 30, 2014.
Outspoken Sarawak minister Tan Sri Dr James Masing, who had worked closely with Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad when he was Barisan Nasional chairman, said he had lost respect for the man he had once held in high esteem for defending Perkasa's Datuk Ibrahim Ali over the Bible-burning issue.

The Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) president said: "I used to have the highest respect for Tun Mahathir. Now I have second thoughts on his wisdom".

“In the name of Islam, and in defence of the sanctity of Islam, anything goes now,” Masing said, referring to Dr Mahathir's comments in defending Malay rights group Perkasa and its call for Malay-language Bibles to be burned.

The former prime minister said it was not a problem to burn the Bibles as long as there were good intentions.

Dr Mahathir, who is also a patron of Perkasa, added that Islam also allowed the Quran to be burned and not discarded all over the place, or to be stepped on, if it was no longer used.

"So, burning the Quran with good intentions is not a problem," he said at a public event in Kuala Lumpur.

He said Mahathir seemed to be advocating that there was only one religion in Malaysia, or that Muslims in this country were allowed to practice in any manner they wish without regard to the sensitivities of other religions.

“If a former prime minister of Malaysia sanctions the burning of Bibles, then God save this country.”

Tan Sri Bernard Dompok (pic, left), the former president of United Pasokmomogun Kadazan Dusun Murut Organisation (Upko), which is also part of the BN coalition, questioned Dr Mahathir's reasoning.

“I am totally surprised that Tun Mahathir could come up with a statement like that,” said Dompok.

“He says holy books can be burned if they are already old and no longer used. But that is hardly the case here.

“By no stretch of the imagination can you equate the burning of Bibles as propagated by Ibrahim Ali, to the disposal of old books. The intention is totally different.”

Sarawak's PKR chief Baru Bian was even more hard-hitting when he said: "He's either senile or intentionally fanning hatred against the Christians”.

Baru, a state lawmaker, said if Dr Mahathir is intentionally fanning hatred, then he should be arrested and charged with sedition.

“We will wait whether this time the attorney-general has the guts to do the right thing or will he make excuses again.”

Star Sabah president Datuk Dr Jeffery Kitingan said Mahathir's statement is “stupid, provocative and incitive", coming from a "wise, old-man".

“It doesn't help in promoting peace and harmony nor the BN concept of 1Malaysia. It also shows the real Mahathir, a racial extremist and a religious bigot," he said.

Kitingan, a Sabah lawmaker, said Mahathir being a former prime minister, should be promoting peace and harmony and showing a good example to the younger generation.

On Monday, the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC), in defending its decision not to charge the Perkasa chief, said in a statement that Ibrahim's call for Bibles to be burned must be viewed in its entire context.

It said Ibrahim's statement was in response to the reported distribution of Bibles to Muslim students of SMK Jelutong in Penang.

"As decided by the court, before a statement is said to have seditious tendencies, the statement must be viewed in the context it was made.

"When studied in its entire context, Datuk Ibrahim's statement is not categorised as having seditious tendencies.

"It was clear Datuk Ibrahim Ali had no intention to create religious tension, but was only defending the purity of Islam."

Ibrahim's call last year to burn the Bibles that contained the word Allah had sparked outrage among Christian groups and politicians, with critics accusing Putrajaya of double standards in its use of the Sedition Act. – October 30, 2014.

- See more at:

No country for dogs but Syed Azmi wanted to prove otherwise

Syed Azmi Alhabshi (right) who organised the controversial ‘I want to touch a dog’ event told a forum last night he was affected by a video clip showing Malaysians mistreating a blind man and his guide dog. On the left is Umno Youth exco member and Islamic scholar Dr Fathul Bari Mat Jahya. – The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Raiezal, October 31, 2014.
A video showing Malaysians treating a blind man and his guide dog badly spurred activist Syed Azmi Alhabshi to hold the controversial "I want to touch a dog" event that outraged many Malays, who felt it was an insult to Islam.

Syed Azmi said he was affected by the video clip when he realised people were rude towards the blind man because of the dog.

"In the video, people were shoo-ing the dog and the blind man, and that hurt me a lot because we also have projects with the blind and to be treated like that just because he was different, that hurt me.

"I asked myself, will I act differently, will I save the blind man? I don't know because I am afraid of dogs," he said to a question from the audience at the "acceptance v conventional sensitivity: where is the middle ground?" forum organised by Umno Youth last night.

Some 200 people, mostly Muslims, were at the forum which was also attended by Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin and the wing's exco member and Islamic scholar Dr Fathul Bari Mat Jahya.

Many questions were thrown at Syed Azmi from the floor, but mostly on "why did you do it?", "did you prepare gloves at the event" and "who's advice did you seek before organising the event".

Syed Azmi sounded apologetic but the situation did not get out of hand. No anger was shown towards him.

He said while watching the video, he realised many people were ignorant and did not understand about dogs.

He then wrote on his Facebook page "I think I want to touch a dog because I don't understand this concept or this issue in Malaysia" and subsequently, he received a lot of comments and feedback.

That he said, got him and his team to come up with the idea of organising the "I want to touch a dog" event, which was aimed at educating and helping people overcome their fear of dogs and learn compassion for all animals, which Islam teaches.

The October 19 event in Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya, attracted about 1,000 Malaysians, and many took the opportunity to touch and pet dogs of various breeds, while volunteers demonstrated how the cleansing ritual was done according to Islamic rites.

Despite obtaining approval from the state religious authorities and inviting an ustaz to give a talk on Islam’s views on dogs, Syed Azmi drew flak from many Malays, who felt it was an insult to Islam.

His detractors circulated his mobile phone number on the Internet, urging the public to harass him.

He has also been the subject of death threats online, and has been accused of apostasy, of being a Christian in disguise, and of attempting to spread a new religion among Muslims
in Malaysia.

Last Saturday, Syed Azmi apologised for the furore, adding that he did not intend to insult Muslims Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin says people needed to discuss the ‘I want to touch a dog’ event rationally. His wing hosted a forum on the issue yesterday. – The Malaysian Insider pic by Afif Raiezal, October 31, 2014.but only wanted to educate society to overcome their fear of dogs.

At last night's forum, he again apologised for the fallout from the event and said he did not anticipate that overexcited attendees would carry and hug the dogs.

"Just like me, we expected people to be afraid of dogs. What we did not expect – we were so naive – was that some of them got 'syiok' and overexcited after touching the dogs because they were so cute that they carried and hugged the animals.

"We wanted people to overcome their fears, we never expected it to sway from our original aim of educating people and I apologise for that."

Dr Fathul Bari said although Islam was a religion that promoted discussions and respected differences, he advised the organisers of the event to be more careful in the future and to ensure conventional sensitivities were adhered to.

"Those who criticised on Facebook, please do not react so quickly," he said.

Khairy said in the greater scheme of things, the event was a small matter but what was not small was the reaction of Muslims.

That was why he was supportive of last night's forum, which he felt was needed for people to discuss the issue in a rationale manner instead of resorting to threats.

"What kind of society do we have that some has to resort to death threats? This is not the Islamic way. You do not manage disagreements by telling people you want to slap or kill them or that you don't belong to this country." – October 31, 2014.

'Semen found but no proof of penetration'


1pm: Chief justice Arifin allows Shafee's request to submit tomorrow and for the defence to reply on Monday. Court adjourns for the day.

12.55pm: Court adjourns for lunch and the prosecution is to submit in the afternoon, but Shafee (right) asks his submission to be made tomorrow morning.

He says he intends to finish it tomorrow itself. The judges discuss the request.

12.40pm: Sangeet shows Anwar's cell was dirty before Anwar was placed there. She also pointed to the toilet in the cell and notes there was no sink inside.

The sink is outside the cell, she says in reply to questions from Justice Abdull Hamid on a police officer's conflicting testimony that he had heard Anwar brush his teeth, in contrast to the High Court judgment that states the police saw the opposition leader brushing his teeth.

"This shows that Anwar cannot have brushed his teeth outside, as the sink is outside the cell," she explains.

12.25pm: Ram says the sperm cells were not properly separated by the Chemistry Department.

He says the DNA evidence and scientific evidence is unreliable and hence there is no corroboration of Saiful's claim of being sodomised.

Ram points out that the hearing before the Federal Court is now in its third day, and he suggests the Court of Appeal in finding Anwar guilty and sentencing him within two days may have rushed the process.

He says as a result, the defence was not accorded a fair hearing in the Court of Appeal.

Ram finishes his submission and Sangeet continues with the defence.

Sangeet points to the lock-up diary to show the state of Anwar's cell during his detention.

12.10pm: Ram says there was no seminal stain on Saiful's trousers after the incident.

Justice Suriyadi asks if there is evidence that Saiful’s underwear was washed.

Ram says the underwear Saiful had used on the day of the alleged incident was washed but seminal stains were found on another underwear, which he did not use on that day.

"If seminal stain was found on that underwear, then there should also be similar stains on the trousers he used on the day of the incident," he adds.

Ram says the government chemist was biased in not wanting to answer questions from defence lawyers.

12.05pm: Outside the courtrrom, DAP's Ronnie Liu (right in photo) causes a commotion when he is blocked by court officers from entering the courtroom without a pass.

Liu claims he and others have been entering the courtroom without a pass for two days, and thus should not be stopped.

He has given his IC to the court officers and insists on waiting till he gets a pass to enter.

12.00pm: Hence, Ram says doubt should be given to the accused.

He says that the pro-forma report from the hospital states that Saiful resisted but there were no defensive wounds.

"Yet all four doctors, including three from HKL, state there are no signs of injury. Saiful says he was ravaged in a rough manner, resulting in excruciating pain, but there is no injury."

"The doctors said there ought to be injury if there was force and resistance as stated in the pro-forma.

"If K-Y jelly was used, they should accept the evidence of David Wells that there should be signs of injury due to the amount of force used," he adds.

11.50am: Ram says while Saiful claimed that the sodomy incident took place for five minutes when he testified in court, he, however, had told Supt Jude and the HKL doctor's that it went on for 30 minutes.

"If this is so (the longer duration), there will be signs of injury. This casts serious doubt on Saiful's testimony," he adds.

11.40am: Ram says the HKL doctor did not find any signs of tear or defensive wounds on Saiful.

"There is doubt to the factum of penetration on Saiful," he adds.

He points out that Dr Mohd Osman (right) also found the anus to be normal.

"How do you find semen in the rectum when there is no evidence of penetration," he says, adding that unless the items are different samples.

He argues that the trial judge and the Court of Appeal judges had erred in assuming that the right samples were found.

11.30am: DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang is in court with PKR's Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul.

10.50am: Ram says there is clear misdirection, which has created a serious miscarriage of justice when the Court of Appeal did not take this into consideration.

He further submits that the evidence from Pusrawi doctor Dr Mohd Osman Abdul Hamid should be considered, and that if he was not telling the truth in the defence case, the prosecution can readily impeach him.

"However, Dr Osman's evidence was not rebutted, despite him stating that Saiful complained of pain in his anus for a week and that plastic was inserted in Saiful's anus."

10.45am: Anwar's supporters begin to swell, with some 100 now gathered outside the Palace of Justice.

Apart from supporters, there are also those selling pro-Anwar T-shirts, with the words "Rakyat Hakim Negara".

10.30am: Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar enters the courtroom and takes a seat next to her younger sisters. Also in court is national laureate A Samad Said.

Ram Karpal continues with his submissions. He says this is a crucial issue of tampering.

According to defence expert witness Dr David Wells, he notes, the big plastic bag (P27) is not foolproof.

Ram adds investigation officer Supt Jude Pereira (left) also admitted the IGSO did not permit him to re-open exhibits that had already been sealed.

"The IGSO guidelines are designed to ensure the integrity of exhibits are not compromised by ensuring they are separately labelled and not mixed with other unrelated exhibits."

Justice Suriyadi Halim Omar, one of the five Federal Court judges, asks whether it is tampering the whole samples or just the cutting open of the big plastic bag, and Ram says it should be considered the whole samples as a result of the opening.

10.20am: Defence lawyer Ram Karpal says there is no reason for investigation officer Supt Jude Pereira to re-open the specimen when he went back to his office as it was already carefully sealed by the Hospital Kuala Lumpur doctors.

Pereira, he adds, cut open the P27 (the plastic bag containing the samples retrieved from Saiful).

"They (the samples) could have been compromised," he says.

"However, the appellate court defended this, saying Pereira was following the Inspector-General's Standing Orders (IGSO)."

Ram says Pereira was asked on the IGSO and the IO (investigation officer) agreed he did not follow the guidelines by the book.

"He says the items ought to be separated, when asked which paragraph in the IGSO  says all items should be packed differently and not mixed with others.

"He had sealed all receptacles and placed them in separate plastic bags and sealed each plastic bag and placed it in the bigger plastic bag (P27), which was sealed again."

10.07am: Ram Karpal says the defence’s expert witness in the trial agreed that the 18 allele should have been reported.

"The 18 allele does not belong to ‘Male Y’. The presence of the DNA of a third party on those samples lends great weight to the defence contention that those samples must have been tampered with by third party. The IO (investigation officer Jude Periera) handled both samples.”

Ram also says there was a break in the chain of evidence.

Seah, he explains, received the samples (Saiful's) and also his trousers and underwear from Pereira on June 30 and July 1, 2008. She says she found traces of semen in B5, B7, B8 and B9.

9.51am: Defence lawyer Ram Karpal says the 18 allele is also found on the towel which was taken from the lock-up.

"The presence of the 18 allele cannot be from the doctors who examined it. The IO (investigation officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira) may have contaminated it.

"This should be investigated further. Chemist Nor Aidora Saedon also did not investigate the presence of the 18 allele."

Apart from the towel, the 18 allele DNA profile was also found in Saiful's rectum.

"The fact that there was an 18 allele here (towel) and also in B9 (high rectum swab of Saiful) which was examined by Seah, belonged to the same person - possibly the IO - who must have tampered with both exhibits."

9.38am: Ram Karpal submits on the discovery of an 18 allele, which should have been reported. He says 'Male Y' is not the 18 allele.

"This ought to have been reported. This means it is contaminated and we do not know who it is. (Chemistry Department) Dr Seah Lay Hong (left) has failed to follow her guidelines (where she should report the matter)."

According to the Chemistry Department guidelines, the difference between one allele to another, for example between 18 and 19, if it exceeds by 15 to 25 percent, should be reported.

This 18 allele is reported to be 25 percent higher than the 19 allele.

9.36am: Court proceeding begins with Chief Justice Arifin presiding. Four other Federal Court judges take the bench.

Defence lawyer Ram Karpal Singh continues his submission from yesterday.

9.25am: Lead prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah walks into the courtroom.

The court is preparing to get ready while Anwar is seen discussing with Gopal Sri Ram and other lawyers.

The courtroom is already packed with people.

9.10am: Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim enters the courtroom. There is a slight commotion outside where loud shouting was heard.

Also in court is PKR president and wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and her daughter and youngest son.

With Wan Azizah is her father, Wan Ismail Wan Mahmood.

8.55am: There are representatives from the various foreign embassies present, including United States, Australia, United Kingdom and the European Union.

Also Queens Counsel Mark Trowell is holding a watch for LawAsia and Law Council of Australia as well as the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Among those in the public gallery is Wangsa Maju MP Tan Kee Kwong. Anwar Ibrahim's lead counsel Gopal Sri Ram arrives in court.

8.31am: People are trickling into the courtroom.

Among the opposition members already in court are Tumpat MP Kamarudin Jaafar, Batu Buruk assemblyperson Syed Azman Syed Mohamad and Kelana Jaya MP Wong Chen.

The international observers are seated on the extreme right of the court. The public gallery can fit 70 people but in the past two days, it is packed to the brim with 80 or more.

Deputy head of the prosecution division in the Attorney-General’s Chambers Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria is already in court.

For the defence, Sangeet Kaur Deo and Eric Paulsen are getting ready for the hearing.

8am: Only a small crowd of a dozen Anwar Ibrahim’s supporters is in the vicinity of the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya. Unlike yesterday, there are no protesters.

Those milling outside the court complex are mostly police personnel and journalists.

The court case is expected to resume at 9.30am.

7.35am: The prosecution team led by government-appointed lawyer, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, is expected to seek a longer jail term for Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in the Federal Court as the Sodomy II case enters its third day today.

Shafee is likely to submit either later this morning or in the afternoon on the issues raised by newly appointed Anwar's lead counsel, retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram.

The Umno-linked lawyer had told journalists outside court yesterday that "there was nothing new” that was raised by Anwar's defence team over the past two days.

Throughout the sodomy trial and the prosecution's appeal at the Court of Appeal last March, the case was handled by the late Karpal Singh who was tragically killed in a car crash early this year.

Initially, former Bar Council chairperson Sulaiman Abdullah, who led the defence when Anwar was charged in 2008, was slated to lead the PKR de facto leader's team.

However, he has not fully recovered following a surgery to his leg, and the defence team subsequently approached Gopal Sri Ram.
In the morning, defence lawyer and Karpal’s son, Ram Karpal Singh, is expected to continue his submission on the discrepancy in the DNA findings linking ‘Male Y’ to Anwar.

Yesterday, Ram had submitted on the possibility of the samples taken from alleged victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's anus could be contaminated following the presence of an unidentified male DNA which was not reported by the Chemistry Department.

The unidentified DNA was found in the peri-anal and high rectum swab from Saiful.

He also said the samples were given to the department 96 hours after the alleged sodomy incident and yet it was found to be in "pristine" condition.

Ram (right) questioned how the samples from the low rectum and high rectum swabs could still be fresh when they were not kept in the freezer as recommended. Investigating officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira had kept it in a steel cabinet at his office.

Sangeet Kaur Deo, another scion of the Karpal family and a member of Anwar’s huge defence team, also questioned the manner three items - a mineral water bottle, a toothbrush and a white towel - was retrieved from the opposition politician's cell when he was held overnight at the Kuala Lumpur police contingent headquarters.

She complained that there was deception and trickery adopted by the police in trying to get Anwar's DNA after the Permatang Pauh MP had refused to give his sample at the Hospital Kuala Lumpur.

Sangeet also argued that there was no evidence that Anwar had used those items.

Malaysiakini is covering the proceedings live.

How far is the racial/political divide actually a religious divide?

So all these vices, ‘vice promoting’ events, and places of vices, must be banned. Those who resist are enemies of Islam and hence enemies of the Malays as well. Malaysia is divided into two: between those who uphold Islam and those who ‘insult’ Islam. And when we divide Malaysia between Muslims and those perceived as anti-Islam we also divide Malaysia into Malays and those seen as anti-Malays.


Raja Petra Kamarudin

When they look at the race problem that is plaguing the country, the older generation would look at what it used to be back in the 1950s and 1960s, what we call ‘zaman Merdeka’ or the Merdeka era, and would compare it with the Malaysia of today, 60 years on.

Those of us who lived or grew up in that era would understand what these people mean. Malaysia of 60 years ago and the Malaysia of today seem like two different countries.

The younger generation that just look at Malaysia of the post-Reformasi days, meaning 1998/1999, or post-2008 Malaysia, would not be able to see the glaring difference between the ‘two Malaysias’ that we are referring to. They do not have a basis for comparing the ‘two Malaysias’.

Of course, we hear or read about what the older generation have to say regarding Malaysia of the Merdeka era. But hearing about it is never the same as living it. It is like when my older generation tells us stories about the Japanese Occupation of Malaya or the turmoil in the two weeks after the Japanese surrender. You can only appreciate what happened if you were there and personally suffered the agony of those times.

The question is why was Malaysia or Malaya of 60 years ago different from Malaysia of today? What happened over those 60 years that transformed the country into what it is today, a country divided by race? I would sum it up to two reasons: religion and politics.

Religion, meaning in this particular case Islam, was never really a ‘big thing’ in the Merdeka era, if I may be permitted to describe it so. If you were religious you were religious. If you were not you were not. No one really cared what you did and everyone lived and let lived and basically did not poke their noses into other peoples’ business.

For example, I first went to Terengganu in 1972 (travelling to and fro from KL) and settled down there in 1974. At that time, we could drink beer openly at the many bars in town, and played gin rummy or poker on weekends, and danced with the ‘taxi girls’ in the only two nightclubs in Kuala Terengganu (plus those in Kota Bharu as well).

No one arrested us. No one passed judgement on us. They did not even comment about the empty beer bottles overflowing from our dustbins. We did our thing and they did their thing. Everyone was free to live the life that they wanted to live. And we did not feel uncomfortable as those in skullcaps passed our house on the way to the mosque while we drank our beer and gambled until dawn in full view of our neighbours.

I loved Terengganu so much I decided to stop shuttling up and down and became a resident of that state. On many a night we would sit in the bar with police officers from the OCPD down to the Inspectors and buy each other a beer or gin. We would also go over to the police officers’ mess to drink and partake in the Thursday night (when the nightclubs are closed) ‘blue movie’ sessions (movies confiscated as ‘evidence’ and for our viewing pleasure before the case comes up for trial).

Hell, Terengganu and Kelantan were the states to be in during the 1960s and 1970s. We had so much fun there and even when we crossed over to Golok all we needed to do was to inform the police officers in Terengganu or Kelantan and their Thai counterparts would wait at the border and escort us into Thailand as VIPs, complete with police escorts and female ‘bodyguards’.

But then in the late-1970s something happened. Anwar Ibrahim and his Islamic youth movement, ABIM, began touring the East Coast to preach the word of Islam. In 1979, we had the Iranian Islamic Revolution and this compounded the problem. Even I discarded my wayward ways and became a fundamentalist Muslim complete with Arab dressing and all.

Then we were told that Islam is not a personal religion between you and God. Islam is an adeen or way of life. We must look at Islam as not just a set of beliefs and rituals but as political Islam. Islam is politics and there is no two ways about it. Prophet Muhammad was a not a religious preacher like Jesus but was a military commander who set up an Islamic State with the Qur’an as the Constitution.

Eventually, it became a them-and-us situation. Either you are with us or you are against us. If you are not a friend of Islam then you are an enemy of Islam. And since Islam is very much synonymous with Malay (you need to be a Muslim to be a Malay), this invariably split us along racial lines as well.

So now no longer can your race, religion and politics be separated. Race, religion and politics come as a package. To be Malay you must also be Muslim and subscribe to Malay-Islam politics. So, if we divide along religious lines, we must also divide along racial and political lines.

The big change was supposed to have come in 1981. That was the year Tun Dr Mahathir Mohammad took over as Prime Minister. And Dr Mahathir was perceived as the enemy of Islam. In fact, many of his statements in the early days were viewed as heretical and an insult to Islam.

Anwar Ibrahim, according to the late Ustaz Fadzil Noor’s plan, which he told me when we met in Mekah in 1982, was for Anwar to take over the Presidency of PAS. Then Islamic politics would reach its height and Umno would be ousted from power.

The great shock was when Anwar decided to join Umno instead. Nevertheless, the great Islamic divide had already happened and there was no turning back the clock. And with the Islamic divide also came the racial divide and, of course, the political divide.

Five years later PAS was ousted from Kelantan and the Malay divide became permanent.

Today, we are seeing so many problems in Malaysia. The Bible issue, the Allah word issue, the conversion issue, the body-snatching issue, the Muslim child-kidnapping issue, the evangelism issue, the beer issue, the dog issue, etc., are just some of the many problems. Then we have PERKASA, ISMA and many more that continue to divide Malaysians.

Some are religious and some are racial in nature. Some, in fact, are political. But they are all really about Islam because, as I said, race, religion and politics come as a package and cannot be separated.

You cannot be a Malay-Muslim like in the 1950s, 1960s or 1970s and still play poker, drink beer, keep dogs and dance with cabaret girls in the nightclubs. (And surprisingly these types of Malays were not corrupt or took bribes). Today, you need to reject all these un-Islamic activities and vices if you want to be a Malay-Muslim.

So all these vices, ‘vice promoting’ events, and places of vices, must be banned. Those who resist are enemies of Islam and hence enemies of the Malays as well. Malaysia is divided into two: between those who uphold Islam and those who ‘insult’ Islam. And when we divide Malaysia between Muslims and those perceived as anti-Islam we also divide Malaysia into Malays and those seen as anti-Malays.

That is the real crux of the problem. All those anti- or pro-NEP rhetoric or the Chinese school debate is not the problem. That is the by-product of the problem. We discuss those things because we are divided and not that those things divide us.

Anwar says he’s confident of acquittal if…

He congratules his lawyers for a "magnificent" job.


PUTRAJAYA: Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim today congratulated his lawyers for their “magnificent” job of arguing his case for acquittal from the charge of sodomy.

Addressing reporters at the end of today’s hearing of his Federal Court appeal against conviction, Anwar said he was confident of being acquitted if the court “follows the law and adheres to the principles of justice.”

“It cannot make any other decision,” he said.

The defence, with retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram heading a 14-member team, finished its submissions today. The prosecution will begin with its submissions tomorrow.

Anwar expressed disgust with the prosecution for seeking to extend his five-year jail sentence, saying the arguments presented by his lawyers over the past three days were so strong that “there is no question but to concede”.

“This is all disgusting politics,” he remarked.

He described the defence submissions as “very detailed”. “Points of law and facts were clearly stated,” he said. “There is no option but to acquit me from the frivolous charges.”

Anwar is on bail of RM10,000 pending the Federal Court decision. Last March, the Court of Appeal oveturned his High Court acquittal on the charge of sodomising his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.

Will BN heed Ku Li’s warning?

UMNO’s own Ku Li warns of imminent economic collapse unless we do something drastic today.

By J. D. Lovrenciear - FMT

For quite a while Malaysians have been crying out over the uncontrolled, escalating cost of living. When opposition political parties joined the chorus or stood up to champion the rakyat’s misery, the government of the day slammed the politicians for misleading the rakyat and “politicising” the issue.

Now UMNO’s own veteran blue-chip Ku Li has voiced his concerns, warning of an imminent economic collapse if the government of the day continues recklessly with its economic and financial agendas.

The man in the street knows only too well that one cannot have a single decent meal for RM5.00 even at a stall operated by migrant workers. What more take a bus ride or train to and from work daily; put the kids through school and tuition classes; pay for their car and housing loans; re-pay PTPTN loans; and many more.

Amidst talk of a global stock market collapse and given Malaysia’s over-reliance on imported goods – including its staple rice, what will Malaysians do when the tides hit our dinner table?

We seem to be inundated with politically charged dog, cow-head, swine and ‘Allah’ issues. And to cap it all, we do not seem to see an end to sodomy cases either.

Can Malaysians continue to hoodwink ourselves any longer – especially those among us who still fight tooth and nail to keep BN at the helm?

If we side with the opposition’s clarion call for economic reform, we will be branded “ungrateful”. Now that BN’s own team player has sent out a chilling warning, what would we be branded if we joined Ku Li’s call for reform?

Let us talk basics then. What use is there to preach about creating a high income nation when the rakyat eats low income rice?

Just take the ‘imported’ and ‘AAA’ grade Thai fragrant rice sold in our supermarkets. The price is way beyond some local and ‘pre-mixed’ grades. Yet, even that imported rice is far below the premium quality rice that ordinary working-class people in Thailand, Cambodia and Myanmar eat.

Do Malaysians know this? They are eating inferior rice compared to their ‘poorer’ neighbouring countries!

Now there’s the RM25.1 billion in 2013 that was remitted by our imported foreign labor. It was only RM10.5 billion in 2009.

We are talking about only the registered foreign workers’ remittance. What about the 1 million or more illegal workers sending money out of Malaysia?

Not only are we reliant on imported food, we are happily letting our money leave the country in exchange for ‘minimum wage’ workers.

No, this must end and it should end sooner rather than later.

If opposition politicians cry out with concern, BN followers say it is politically motivated and that DAP, PAS and PKR are trying to topple the government.

When the rakyat keep crying out silently as they struggle under the yoke of increasing fuel and food costs, we are told not to be lazy and that we are spoilt from being spoon-fed.

Now that Ku Li himself is warning of a total economic collapse what have BN leaders to say? What have the pro-BN followers to say?

When and how can we, Malaysians save ourselves and this blessed nation from this madness?

Or must we now write off even Ku Li?

AG’s statement on Bible-burning boggles the mind

Section 3(3) of the Act makes it abundantly clear that "intention" (however good) is irrelevant.

By Stanley Isaacs - FMT

The recent public statement by the Attorney-General giving his reasons for not prosecuting Ibrahim Ali for sedition has not in any way allayed the discontent of many people including even a cabinet minister.

They cannot understand, and rightly so, why this man is being protected from prosecution.

On the contrary the reasons given by the AG is nothing but mitigation for the man whose outburst was a call to Muslims in this country to commit a serious crime under the Penal Code.

If indeed the story given in the AG’s Statement is true that there was an attempt by a non-Muslim student to distribute Bibles to students including Muslim students, the AG should know very well that if the act constituted an offence, it was an offence by the student or students concerned.

The offence does not extend to the Bible or to the millions of people in Malaysia who use the Bible as their holy book.

Would not those millions of Christians be troubled and offended by the call of that man to seize and burn Bibles? Does not such a call constitute a “seditious tendency… to promote ill will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia” within the meaning of Section 3 of the Sedition Act?

It was reported in a news portal on October 27 that Minister Khairy Jamaluddin said, “It is up to the Attorney-General. My personal opinion is when one says they want to burn the holy book of another, that is seditious.”

The AG gave two reasons why he chose not to prosecute Ibrahim. One was that, taken in its overall context, the man’s call to seize and burn Bibles did not have a seditious tendency.

The other was that the man had “no intention to offend or to provoke”. Both those reasons are flawed in law because they are not defences recognised by the Sedition Act.

On the contrary Section 3(3) of the Act has made it abundantly clear that “intention” (however good) of the person uttering the statement, is irrelevant if the statement has a seditious tendency.

It boggles my mind how the AG could excuse the man on grounds of his good intention when the law says otherwise.

It also boggles my mind how burning the Bible would defend the sanctity of the Islamic religion.

In such a prima facie blatant case of sedition as this, the AG would have done well to let the court decide if Ibrahim was entitled to the defence of “context” and “intention” as given by him.

Now, what about the many others who in a swoop, were recently charged for sedition? Were the considerations of “context” and “intention”, even though not valid considerations, not applied to them also before they were charged?

I think not.

Stanley Isaacs is the former Head of Prosecution, Attorney-General’s Chambers Malaysia.

Growing Islamic fundamentalism seen pushing Malays to quit country

BY BOO SU-LYN - The Malay Mail

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 30 — Malays could be next in line after the Chinese to leave the country, in a bid to escape the growing religious fundamentalism and authoritarianism that leaves little room for free thought and dissent, according to activists and observers.

While Malaysia bills itself as a moderate Muslim nation, recent developments have demonstrated an increasingly conservative and hard-line approach to Islam here that is intolerant of cultures and practices not sanctioned by religious groups and authorities.

Malaysians for Malaysia convener Azrul Mohd Khalib said the Friday sermons prepared by the religious authorities that paint non-Muslims as enemies of Islam, as well as the use of labels such as liberalism, pluralism and humanism to vilify fellow believers, have dismayed and scared Muslims.

“Thinking Muslims are being marginalised and persecuted,” Azrul told Malay Mail Online yesterday.

“It is creating a climate of fear, suspicion and prejudice. Because of that, Muslims who do not prescribe to that belief system do not see themselves as being welcomed or even tolerated in this country,” the social activist added.

Azrul said many Muslims have started emigrating in the past 15 years based on anecdotal evidence, noting that Islamic authorities prohibit dissent and discussions of the country’s predominant religion.

“You are told ‘you cannot use logic and rationale to understand and practise Islam. ‘You must only refer to the Quran and hadith and nothing else’,” he said.

Hadith are “traditions” from the time of Prophet Muhammad that are not contained in the Quran.

Former de facto law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said on Tuesday that more Malay-Muslims could be expected to leave the country if local religious authorities continue to pursue and prosecute those whose opinions they deem “deviant”.

Over the years, Islamic authorities have gradually become more rigid in their interpretation and application of the Shariah code in Islam.

They vilified and attacked a recent dog-petting event in which some Muslims touched dogs, which are considered unclean here in Malaysia. The programme triggered such outrage that its organiser received death threats.

On Tuesday, the National Fatwa Council issued an edict banning Muslims from “celebrating” Halloween, which it categorised as a Christian celebration of the dead.

Kelantan this month began enforcing a by-law that empowers state authorities to fine Muslim men up to RM1,000 or jail them for up to a year, or both, for failing to attend Friday prayers thrice in a row.

An Oktoberfest-themed beer festival in Selangor also drew the ire of Muslim groups earlier this month, despite the promotional event being targeted at and restricted to non-Muslims.

Muslim intellectual Kassim Ahmad is also being prosecuted by Islamic authorities for allegedly suggesting that Muslims need only follow the Quran, and not the accompanying Hadith. The view differs from that which is officially approved.

Malaysia has also outlawed the Shiah denomination of Islam, which it considers deviant from the Sunni school that is officially sanctioned here.

Malaysia’s religious authorities also frequently warns against liberalism, with the federal government’s Islamic Development Department (Jakim) reminding Muslims last week in its Friday sermon that this concept, along with pluralism, was a threat to Malay-Muslim unity as it could weaken their faith.

Jakim also said the National Fatwa Council had in its 74th meeting in 2006 declared liberal thinking as heretical.

“The very same liberal ideas, which are condemned and persecuted, are actually what made Islam a great humanist religion. Look back at history. Our religious authorities have lost their way and like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, are leading others astray,” Azrul said.

Social activist Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir said she knows of several Malays who say they do not want to return to their homeland.

“It’s not for economic reasons, but simply because they feel that the environment here has become so negative and oppressive that it’s impossible to be able to live as peaceful, productive citizens any more,” Marina told Malay Mail Online.

“You just never know when something that is perfectly acceptable one day becomes ‘haram’ the next day,” she added, using the Malay word for “forbidden”.

The daughter of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad also noted the discomfort with the authorities’ continuous intrusion into people’s private lives at the expense of more important things such as injustice against women.

Global Movement of Moderates (GMM) CEO Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah said most of the leaders and intellectuals of “kaum muda” (young moderates) used to seek refuge in Penang and Singapore during the 1930s.

“Because in Penang and Singapore, they are more free to share their thoughts. Because there is less institutionalised religious authorities that would go after them,” Saifuddin told Malay Mail Online.

“The kaum muda were simply practising their intellectual freedom to interpret Islam in a more progressive way. And Islam allows that. You can have different interpretations. And Islam encourages dialogues among those with different opinions, not to prosecute, unless of course, if your opinion is tantamount to treason or glaringly unlawful,” the former deputy minister added.

Centre for Policy Initiatives director Dr Lim Teck Ghee said Malays in Malaysia are following the trend of Muslims in other Muslim countries who flee to Western nations, such as Australia, the US and European Union countries, to escape religious fundamentalism and political authoritarianism at home.

But he acknowledged that Malaysia has no statistics on the racial and religious breakdown of the country’s migrant outflow.

“I expect younger educated Malays to be concerned with the growing religious extremism and intolerance and to have this as the major factor in making them leave,” Lim told Malay Mail Online.

“Out-migration for Malaysians has never been solely about making a better living abroad. It has been the combination of socio-economic and political factors. Non-Malays have felt the pain of religious and racial discrimination. Now it is the turn of many Malays to feel a similar sense of deprivation and injustice,” the political analyst added.

According to a World Bank report in 2011, an estimated one million Malaysians are residing overseas.

More than two million Malaysians have emigrated since Merdeka.

Last year, a total 308,834 high-skilled Malaysians moved overseas, with 47.2 per cent going to Singapore, 18.2 per cent to Australia, 12.2 per cent to US and the rest to other countries like UK and Canada.

According to the same report, the number of skilled Malaysians living abroad rose 300 per cent in the last two decades, with two out of every 10 Malaysians with tertiary education opting to leave for either Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries or Singapore.

Extreme Situations Warrant Prosecution Intervention On Seditious Issues - A-G

PUTRAJAYA, Oct 30 (Bernama) -- Prosecution intervention on seditious issues is deemed neccesary as situations have become too extreme, says Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail.

He said the level of tolerance and understanding which existed among the people in the country was being eroded and this might affect current and future generations.

He said in the past, there was no need for prosecution intervention as the people were able to handle comments on seditious cases maturely and patiently. However, the situation has changed.

"In the past, inappropriate social behaviour and language were unacceptable and those crossing the line were immediately stopped by their political and community leaders.

"Today, prosecution intervention is considered necessary as the situation has gone to the extreme," said Abdul Gani when speaking at the Attorney-General's Chambers monthly assembly here Thursday.

He said there were differences between orderly campaigns to discuss and debate issues and campaigns meant to undermine the country's sovereignty and public order.

These included attacks on religion, race and culture, the constitutional monarch and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, as well as calls for Sabah and Sarawak to leave the Federation of Malaysia.

"It must be recognised that no government can stop its people from discussing matters relating to their constitutional and legal rights.

"This is part of the accountability and transparency of any elected government in any country in the world. Similarly, also recognised are actions taken to respect ideals created by the Federal Constitution.

"All rights should be respected and implemented unless the Federal Constitution has been amended through a vote or a referendum of the people. This is because, all the elements are elements of a social contract which is the pillar of the Federal Constitution and Malaysia," he said.

Abdul Gani also reminded that the freedom of speech in a multiracial and multireligious country should be held with responsibility and respect to the sensitivities of other people.

"Today, technological development is speeding up the dissemination of information, regardless of whether it is good or bad. As soon as we hit the button, we are no longer in control of the destination of an information. We should therefore, think carefully of our action and its consequences," he said.

On the decision not to charge Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali for sedition, Abdul Gani said an indepth examination of the statements made by Ibrahim found he had carefully laid out his statement.

Ibrahim had said he did not intend to create a religious commotion but to protect the sanctity of Islam under the law.

He said the Perkasa president had clearly stated that he meant the group which distributed the special Bahasa Melayu-version Bible which mentioned Allah to Malay students.

At a media conference later, Abdul Gani said each person was entitled to defend his own religion, so long as it was not against the law.

"It is not easy to charge someone in court, without complete facts, information and report. It is better if the department takes one case to court and win, rather than bringing 10 cases to court and win only five," he said.

On Jan 21, last year, police reports were lodged against Ibrahim for calling on Muslims to seize and burn copies of the Bible which contained the word, 'Allah' or other Arabic and Jawi religious words at a media conference after a Perkasa convention in Penang.

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Ramkarpal: DNA samples no longer pristine

Rosmah, Marina sebagai teladan: Apa kata Dr Mahathir?

Six-year-old 'soldier for Khilafa': kids radicalised in shocking video

A Muslim youth group is under investigation after a disturbing video of children as young as six years old calling for an end to Australian democracy was unearthed by 7News.

In the vision, children as young as six years old call for violent action against non-Muslims and to reject Australia and its values.

A terror risk expert says it's brainwashing, aimed at creating violent extremists.

The video shows four Australian children, aged six to 13, calling for an end to our way of life.

"These are disturbing and shocking images and they do raise concerns about the welfare of the four young boys who are identified in the video,” Family and Community Services Minister Gabrielle Upton said.

A group calling itself The Muslim Youth Project runs regular events for young children.

In the video of the event held on September 21 in 2013 in Lakemba, young boys rally under the banner "Soldiers of Khilafa" with a six-year-old proclaiming:

"You're never too young to be a Soldier for Khilafa."

Read more:

Ex-Google employee held for trying to join Islamic State

HYDERABAD : A former Google employee was detained for allegedly trying to join the Islamic State (IS) in Iraq, police said, after making a breakthrough which could help them bust an organised network of home-grown jihadis, planning to join the militant group.

Police sources in Hyderabad said that security analyst Munawad Salman, 30, a resident of Musheerabad, was held after officials tracked his conversation for months and was certain that his hidden agenda to visit Saudi Arabia was to cross over to Iraq and join Islamic State .

"He is being grilled for more information. This is perhaps the first time, a software engineer has got attracted to a global terror outfit like Islamic State in the recent past," a senior police official told TOI.

"The arrest is very significant and could open a big door for us to trace more educated youth getting influenced by militants," the officer said, referring to IS, whose main motive is to establish Caliphate (Islamic State) in vast swathes of the world.

Software engineer Salman, quit his Google India job six months ago. Since then, he had been actively reading 'Al Isabha' web propaganda, which is again run by sympathizers of Islamic State , formerly Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and al-Qaida, to target Indian Muslims, sources said.

The techie is learnt to have been in touch with handlers from ISIS for nearly a year and has allegedly exchanged emails before being completely influenced by people behind 'Al Isabha'.

With security agencies on high alert across the country, especially on the look out for prospective people or sympathizers of Islamic State and al-Qaida, planning to join the outfits, they stumbled upon Salman's conversation with his handlers.

During interrogation, Salman said he had a visa to travel to Saudi Arabia and join a local company there.

"He has a proper job visa to go to Saudi Arabia, but there was clear indications that he was planning to join IS either immediately or later. The family members also counselled him to desist from getting attracted to such ideas, when they came to know about the matter," another official said.

The techie is learnt to have been in touch with handlers from ISIS for nearly a year.

This is not the first time members of Islamic State managed to lure youth from Hyderabad as nearly 15 of them, including some engineering students, made vain attempts to join Islamic State and were caught on the West Bengal border in September this year.

It is not clear whether Salman will be counselled and let off, just like the earlier students. Security experts said concerns are mounting whether there are more people waiting in the wings or have slipped out of the country already to join the militant outfit, currently engaged in a bitter battle with US forces.

Last week, the police broke an alleged Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and al-Qaida nexus in the city with arrest of two persons. They were planning to go to Afghanistan and join al-Qaida.

Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami chief found guilty of rape, genocide; to be hanged to death

Dhaka: In what a special Bangladeshi war crimes tribunal called a 'historic' verdict, the head of Jamaat-e-Islmai, Motiur Rahman Nizami, was handed death sentence for 1971 war crimes, sparking fears of fresh violence.

71-year-old Nizami was tried on over a dozen charges and found guilty of genocide, torture, murder, rape etc.

Announcing the verdict, the three-member court ruled that the former cabinet minister must be “hanged by neck to death” as despite being a scholar he “misinterpreted Quran” and was involved in killing of professors, doctors and writers during the nine-month conflict, the AFP quoted prosecutor Haider Ali.

During the conflict, Nizami ran a brutal militia named Al-Badr, which was notorious for having committed heinous war crimes.

Security has been beefed up in Dhaka and across the country as the verdict has triggered fresh fears of the country's largest religious party fomenting marches and violence in protest of Nizami's death sentence.

Some two lakh women were reportedly raped, three million people were killed and millions more were forced to escape to India in the 1971 war of independence after Bangladesh split from Pakistan.

About a dozen Islamist leaders have been convicted of war crimes by the tribunal which is opposed by the Islamists as a tool by the Sheikh Hasin government to settle scores against the opposition.

While PM Sheikh Hasina considers it as a way to bring to task the perpetrators of atrocities in 1971 war that left scores dead.

MP urges Putrajaya to fix mininum age for marriage – Bernama

An opposition Member of Parliament today called on the the government to fix the minimum age for young couples to get married so as to stop child marriages.

Teo Nie Ching (DAP-Kulai, pic) claimed that besides not attending school any more there was high incidence of divorce which had had a negative impact on the children.

She said although existing laws allowed Malaysians from 16 to 18 years to marry, there were situations which allowed them to enter wedlock at a younger age.

"We can no longer afford to see our young getting married at 11 or 12 years of age. This is one issue that needs immediate attention," she said when debating the Supply Bill 2015 in the Dewan Rakyat today.

Teo said the government had adopted the resolution by the United Nations to stop child marriages in October last year, but there were no clear measures for its implementation in this country.

"The time has come to ensure that children in this country, regardless of religion do not marry until the reach the age of maturity," she said.

She also questioned the logic of giving children the freedom to choose their spouse at a young age when they were not even allowed to have a driving licence or to vote because they had not reached the permitted age.

At the same time, Teo also urged that the allocation to the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development be increased as much of it was spent on social welfare and not just on women.

The Dewan sits again tomorrow. – Bernama, October 29, 2014.

- See more at:

Dr M defends Ibrahim's 'burn Bibles' remark

Dr Mahathir Mohamad has defended Ibrahim Ali for his controversial "burn Bible" remark, saying it is not seditious.

On the contrary, the former prime minister said, the Perkasa chief was advising "something that is acceptable to Muslims" with regard to the practice of burning old copies of the Al-Quran.

"It was not his (Ibrahim's) intention to provoke clashes between Muslims and non- Muslims," Mahathir told reporters today.

However, Mahathir, who is also the patron of Perkasa, declined to comment on the attorney-general's decision not to prosecute Ibrahim under the Sedition Act for his call to burn the Bible in the Malay language.

The authorities claimed that the statement of Ibrahim (left) was made in defence of Islam, based on complaints that certain quarters had distributed copies of the Bible in the Malay language in a school, including to Muslim students.

Meanwhile, Mahathir said it was common practice for Muslims to burn the Al-Quran, when the copy was old and doing so without ill intentions was not wrong.

"We often burn the Al-Quran, when the Al-Quran is very old. Of course we cannot treat a holy book by throwing it around, so the best solution is to burn," he added.

Therefore, he said it was not an issue for Ibrahim to invite Muslims to burn copies of the Bible if the intention was good.

'Show respect for the Bible'

Nevertheless, Mahathir said Muslims must show respect for the Bible.

"For the Muslims, if they have something or some document which they are averse to, they should not throw it around, they should not throw it on the ground and step on it.   

"They should show respect for the Bible and by burning it the way they burn the Al-Quran, that is permitted," he added.

On the forum, Mahathir said Malaysians can expect to have a female prime minister one day.

"In a democratic country, it is majority support that counts, when a woman gets majority support, she cannot be stopped from becoming prime minister.

"Constitutionally, there are no obstructions, it all depends, in a democratic country, on majority support.

"If she can win a majority of above 50 percent, and your party had elected you as president, then most likely the president of the party, who is a woman, can become prime minister," Mahathir added.

Anwar defends appointing ex-judge as counsel

PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim has defended his decision to appoint retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram as his counsel, follow criticisms on the matter.

"He has been my best defence (counsel)," he said, adding that his performance is "impressive".

Lawyer for the prosecution Mohd Shafee Abdullah also said that it is not wrong for the ex-judge to represent Anwar.

"I don't think we can hinder anyone, as that is his right," he said.

The remarks come after a group of 21 lawyers and activists have added to the chorus demanding that the Bar Council makes clear its stance after a former Federal Court judge acted for Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in his sodomy appeal.

The lawyers, who include former Perkasa vice-president Zulkifli Noordin and pro-Sedition Act leader Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz, said this is because the Bar Council had earlier this year passed a resolution urging the prohibition of retired senior judges to act as counsel in court.

Mohd Khairul (right) had previously proposed an alternative Bar Council after accusing the statutory body of being an opposition sympathiser.

"It is not proper for the Bar Council to have two sets of principles that differ when Anwar Ibrahim is involved and the credibility of the legal profession is surely tarnished by such hypocritical actions," the lawyers said in a joint statement this afternoon.

Gopal Sri Ram yesterday acted as Anwar's new lead counsel and made submissions in the opposition leader's defence in the apex court.

The group urged the Bar Council to immediately weigh into the issue as failure to do so would reflect badly on the body.

"President of the Malaysian Bar maintains a deafening silence, which can only be described as hypocritical, to say the least, in the face of the actions of Gopal Sri Ram. The Bar Council has failed to comply with its own resolution in this matter.

"The Bar Council's silence is a contradiction of its own commitment to uphold justice without fear or favour," they said.

'Principle of antiquity'

The lawyers who signed the joint statement included Faidhur Rahman Abdul Hadi, Azril Mohd Amin, Mohammad Yahya Zakaria and Farah Nadiah Zainuddin.

Other activists who are party to the statement include Zamzuri Mohamed Tahir, Ahmad Soffian Mohd Sheriff, Suhaimi Adnan (right) and Nadiah Hanum Md Nadzri.

The Bar Council in its resolution had said that it is a principle of antiquity in common law that retired judges of superior courts should not appear as counsel in court hearings and this had been observed for decades.

However, it noted that this principle was not abided by in recent years and a group of six retired judges had written to the Bar Council to express concern.

"In the context, retired judges of the superior court having failed to honour tradition and convention by appearing as counsel, they must now be prohibited or restricted by law from continuing with such unacceptable conduct," the Bar said in the resolution.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, when met at the Palace of Justice after attending Anwar's hearing, said he agreed with the Bar Council's resolution but Gopal's appointment was Anwar's personal decision.

"Personally, I will respect the Bar Council resolution but I think this decision is up to Anwar to decide.

"Because the very basic principle in law is that an accused has a right to seek the best defence counsel, so I think this is his personal decision to make," said Lim, who is also Penang chief minister.

Anwar's team defends Gopal

Meanwhile, Anwar's lawyers N Surendran and Eric Paulsen said Gopal's appointment is not an issue as a previous Federal Court decision had already ruled that he can act as counsel despite being a retired superior court judge.

Surendran (left) and Paulsen pointed out that Gopal, as a former federal court judge, was not representing Anwar in a lower court but one that is equal to his level.

"This is the Federal Court, the highest court in the country," they said.

Surendran also clarified that it was Anwar's defence team who approached the ex-judge, following lead counsel Sulaiman Abdullah illness, for his services and not the other way around.

"In the best traditions of the Bar, he agreed to take up the case on a short notice," he said.

Anwar yesterday told reporters that Gopal Sri Ram had approached him for the job.

Surendran also brushed aside criticism over the fact that Gopal Sri Ram had before this represented Umno.

Citing the ex-judge himself, he said a lawyer is "like a cab driver, where if someone stops him he takes them in".

Anwar was on March 7 jailed for five years by the Court of Appeal which found him guilty of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan in 2008.

His final appeal against the sentence began yesterday at the Federal Court and the hearing is slated for two days.

Anwar, who is free on bail, maintains the charge against him is politically motivated.

Court told to acquit Anwar due to 'clear doubt'


5.25pm: Court adjourns after Ram indicates that he will finish his submission tomorrow. Shafee indicates that he can start tomorrow for the prosecution team. The hearing is expected to end on Friday.

5.15pm: Ram says Seah reported that in the high rectal swab there is an unidentified male DNA but she reported it as a "dropping".

"The reading of 18 allele, our defence expert says, should be reported.

"This shows the presence of another person or the high rectal swab has been contaminated (like B5 the peri-anal) swab."

5.10pm: Ram says a clear doubt has emerged, and when this appears, a decision must be given in benefit of the accused.

5.05pm: Ram says the contamination could have been due to from doctors or Supt Jude. "It was innocent contamination."

"At the moment we do not know who and how the peri-anal samples were handled."

5.00pm: Ram says there is a possibility of the samples being contaminated.

He says that there is an unknown male DNA found in B5 besides that of "Male Y" in the peri-anal swab.

4.50pm: Ram says there are examples of degradation of other samples.

(There were 12 swabs taken during the HKL doctor's examination of Saiful).

"Some are pristine some are not," says the lawyer.

"... The Court of Appeal judges had erred where the High Court judge had got it right."

4.40pm: Ram says in every mixture in (sexual acts) sperm cells must be separated from the non-sperm cells.

"But the DNA of 'Male Y' is found to be pristine. The point from Mc Donalds B7, B8 and B9 samples are pristine.

"It cannot be pristine. I go further to say they are not the same samples. If they are the same samples, there will be a lot of degradation," he adds.

4.30pm: Ram says if the samples are not properly preserved, how could it be pristine.

He says in the B8 high rectal swab where there is a mixture i.e. a major and minor contributor.

"It is pristine and this is inconsistent with history.

"Similarly with B9 the lower rectal, it is pristine," he says, adding that the sample was taken after 96 hours but looked fresh.

4.20pm: Ram says if there was a dispute, the prosecution can call its expert witness to rebut.

"The fact is that the samples are found to be pristine."

The defence lawyer says the samples were retrieved after 96 hours, and should show degradation.

Justice Arifin asks if there are samples to show degradation.

"If it is degraded it would become a mess i.e. no reading."

4.10pm: Ram says there is a dispute on the issue of contamination where he feels the appellate judges misdirected themselves.

The lawyer says the defence chemist were “enlightening the court” on what they observed (as to the analysis made by the government chemists).

"There is an 18 allele spotted but it was not reported (in the chemist) report.

"DW4 and DW5' testimonies are from what they observed. The prosecution did not call any witness to rebut their evidence," he says.

3.40pm: Justice Arifin calls for a 15-minute break.

3.30pm: Ram says swabs taken should be frozen.

He points out that the anal swabs were only given to the chemists after 96 hours of the alleged incident

He says the government chemists agree that there will be degradation after 36 hours.

3.15pm: Ram says the Court of Appeal judges description of the defence forensic experts as armchair experts cannot be sustained.

"They are clearly qualified as senior scientists with over 30 years experience," he says.

Ram says Seah's testimony that she found semen samples in Saiful's anus cannot be accepted as the samples were retrieved after 36 hours.

"The DNA obtained, she claimed was in pristine condition as against to it being degraded or badly degraded."

3.05pm: Ram says the court should accept defence witness, forensic expert Brian Mcdonald's evidence as he is a competent chemist.

He says the Court of Appeal judges did not accept the defence expert’s views compared to the High Court (which acquitted Anwar).

Ram notes that the Court of Appeal judges did not consider DW4 (McDonald's) evidence and that of DW2 (David Wells (right)).

"It is pertinent that the trial judge had not criticised DW2 and DW4. The appellate judges could not appreciate the evidence as they did not see them (the foreign experts) testify."

As for the sample taken from Saiful, the defence lawyer questioned its integrity.

"The sample was taken from Saiful on June 28 and it was given to the Chemistry Department on the 30th," he says.

Ram says the samples from Saiful should be stored in a freezer but it was kept in Supt Jude Pereira's cabinet.

2.50pm: The document, says Ram, is important for the defence to show to its (defence) experts.

"None of the documents were produced although they are owned by PW5 (Seah).

"Even Seah failed to enlighten the court on the analysis. Without the benefit of doubt of the documents there is doubt on whether they conducted the tests vigorously," he says.

These documents, Ram argues, are important to ensure the guidelines are followed, on the extraction of sperm and the sperm isolation records.

"The standard documents and the SDR reports were not given. This handicapped the defence," he says.

2.40pm: Ram (right) continues with his submission and says the chemist did not do a swipe of the samples to the receptacle.

He says the chemist cannot verify how much DNA volume was collected from Saiful's samples.

Seah could not say as she does not have the records, adds the defence lawyer.

"Prosecution failed to produce the DNA volume and the sperm isolation record. These documents are not provided to the defence."

2.37pm: The hearing resumes. Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng shares a light moment with Anwar, as he opens the door of the accused dock for the opposition leader.

1pm: Ram says if the guideline says the peak is 12 percent, the Chemistry Department cannot ignore other readings or peaks that are higher.

He adds that Seah is selective in what she reported as stutters as it would reveal more parties other than 'Male Y'

"She did not report the peaks of others. She reported a peak of 13 but not a peak of 17 or 18."

Justice Arifin asks for lunch break. Court will resume at 2.30pm.

12.55pm: Ram says alleles come in pairs.

He notes that Seah (right) came to court without showing the department's guidelines.

"The end result is that the findings are unreliable," he warns.

"The documents are not provided to the defence for us to cross-examine," he reiterates.

12.45pm: Ram says everyone has a different DNA profile and there is a small likelihood that a profile is shared with somebody else.

"It is important to see and to report the correct peaks, and stutters."

"The court is not able to ascertain Seah's evidence in terms of stutters and percentage. Some of these documents are not made available to the defence for cross-examination."

He says that 12 samples were taken from Saiful and marked by Dr Siew Shueu Feng of Hospital Kuala Lumpur.

These are rectal swab, peri-anal, high rectum and low rectum swabs.

12.40pm: Several Pakatan Rakyat representatives arrive in court and among them are Kuala Terengganu MP Raja Kamarul Bahrin and Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul (right in photo).

Ram further submits on the allele and stutters as adopted by the Chemistry Department.

"It has not been accredited since 2005," he says.

Two chemists testified during the trial, namely Dr Seah Lay Hong and Noraidora Saedon.

12:25pm: Ram Karpal says there was a "Male Y" in the samples found and this was further linked to the DNA samples retrieved from Anwar's cell.

He says the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that "Male Y" is the appellant.

12.15pm: Sangeet submits there were a series of documents that were not provided to the defence.

She says there is no basis for the judge to dismiss the defence’s application to get the documents.

"This is to ensure there is equal footing and no trial by ambush," she adds.

In the early stages of the trial, Justice Zabidin did not allow the prosecution to provide the documents.

Sangeet argues there was no fair trial and the arrest was made unlawfully.

"There is a culmination of incidents that display the abuse and conspiracy against Anwar," she argues.

Now Ram Karpal begins his submission on DNA.

12.02pm: Sangeet says the original warrant of arrest tendered during the main trial was unlawful.

"The warrant was only issued at the balai (police station). The judge was wrong in ruling to accept these evidence during the main trial based on the same document (i.e. the original warrant of arrest).

"Hence the retrieval of those (three) items should also be considered illegal."

11.45am: Sangeet says there is other evidence (direct) that the prosecution has and it should not rely on circumstantial evidence.

"The prosecution cannot rely on the main trial to rebut what happened in the trial-within-trial."

11.35am: Sangeet says the trial judge ruled that the items were retrieved through unfair means.

She adds that the initial ruling was when he chose to exercise discretion but in the main trial he accepted the evidence.

"The inclusion of the items are through unlawful means. This amounts to trickery and unfairness."

The defence lawyer says the fact it was done through unfair means did not change and hence, there is no need for the trial judge to review his ruling.

Justice Mohd Zabidin, had at first not accepted the three items - towel, toothbrush and water bottle - as evidence during a trial within trial but later reversed his decision.

10.47am: However, Justice Arifin points out that illegally obtained evidence is also admissible in Malaysia.

Sangeet replies that the appellant was arrested in Jalan Segambut and met Jude at the police station at about 8pm and was taken to HKL.

"Anwar declined to give his DNA at the hospital. He was exercising his constitutional right not to do so.

"The entire procedure was wrong as it was against lock-up rules (as prisoners are supposed to be in the lock-up by 6pm)."

Sangeet says the police had detained Anwar overnight when they knew they were there only to record his statement.

"The gave him the three packets and the next morning these items were carefully removed.

"It is his legal right which is being trampled over," she says.

10.45am: Defence lawyer Sangeet says the three items were illegally obtained through trickery and deception and the arrest was unlawful.

The arrest was made without a warrant. "There was an arrest but the warrant of arrest was only issued at IPK KL. Taufik says the arrest is made based on Section 377B (of the Penal Code)."

The judge initially ruled in our favour, says the defence counsel, in not admitting the three items.

"He ruled that the items were unfairly used."

10.40pm: Sangeet says a trial within a trial was held to determine the admissibility of the three items - the Good Morning towel, toothbrush and mineral water bottle.

"(Defence lawyers) Sankara Nair and R Sivarasa (right) testified and they related how Anwar's car was ambushed (by police) in the arrest.

"One superintendent Taufik testified that they got orders to arrest Anwar. There were no grounds given by Taufik to make the arrest, who testified as the only witness in the prosecution," she says.

10.30am: Sangeet argues ‘Male Y’ could be anyone and not necessarily Anwar.

She says during the trial in the High Court, crime scene investigator (CSI) Supt Amidon gave evidence and the deputy public prosecutor (DPP) had asked for the three items to be tendered.

"However, (then lead defence lawyer) Karpal Singh objected. The admission of the three items are wrong. The High Court judge did not want to admit the items.

"However, the judge reviewed the application just before the prosecution closed its case."

10.20am: Justice Abdull Hamid asks when was the water bottle given, and Sangeet says the bottle was given during interrogation.

"You cannot use circumstantial evidence when you have direct evidence through witnesses,” reiterates defence lawyer Sangeet.

The judge asks whether there are authorities on the matter. Sangeet says there are none.

“Are you saying we should use direct evidence in preferential to circumstantial evidence?” ask Justice Abdull Hamid.

“Yes,” says Sangeet. She argues there is no link between the DNA profile of ‘Male Y’ and the appellant (Anwar).

10.15am: Justice Arifin asks whether any material was left in the cell before Anwar went into it.

Defence lawyer Sangeet refers to the lock-up diary. It shows that the lock-up was empty and there were no other detainees.

Another member of the five-member Federal Court panel, Justice Md Raus, says the three items were given to Anwar but Sangeet was asking whether they were used by Anwar.

10.10am: Defence lawyer Sangeet says the High Court judgment states a police officer saw Anwar used the cell toilet and brushed his teeth the morning of July 17, 2008.

However, Sangeet says the police officer only heard as if Anwar was brushing his teeth. He did not see it himself.

"This witness is not allude to the fact that the appellant is brushing his teeth," she argues.

There is an error of fact in this finding by the trial judge, says Sangeet.

"We have witnesses who are asked but they did not see (Anwar using those items)," she said.

"Prosecution cannot rely on circumstantial evidence when direct evidence was there - the police officer did not see."

10.05pm: Pointing to the lock-up diary, defence lawyer Sangeet says it notes that Anwar was found to be sleeping at night, waking up and leaning against the lock-up bars, and then taking ablution and performing his ‘sunat’ prayers.

Anwar was arrested on July 16, 2008 and after going to Hospital Kuala Lumpur, he spent the night at the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters lock-up.

"There is direct evidence and the prosecution cannot rely on the circumstantial evidence when there is direct evidence."

10am: Sangeet Kaur says a toothbrush, soap and towel was given to Anwar while in the lock-up.

She argues none of the evidence from the police witnesses show Anwar had used the items.

"The lock-up diary only states Anwar is in the cell and that he prays in the morning," Sangeet submits.

The three items - a Good Morning towel, toothbrush and mineral water bottle - were allegedly used by the police to obtain Anwar's DNA without his knowledge.

9.50am: It is now defence lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo’s turn to make her submission.

She says that lead defence counsel Gopal Sri Ram had submitted that Saiful is not a credible witness and she reiterates that the Court of Appeal in finding the alleged victim as a credible witness could not stand as they did not see him testify.

Sangeet adds that DNA from Anwar was obtained from items retrieved through the cell where he was in.

The prosecution had failed to link male Y to the case, she stresses.

"The court cannot rely on circumstantial position as there is direct evidence as it comes from the testimony of the police officers who were guarding the cell."

9.45am: Defence lawyer N Surendran begins his submission by citing various authorities on why statement from the dock can be of weight.

According to him, Anwar is the only person who gave a statement from the dock who is acquitted of a crime when the Kuala Lumpur High Court judge found him not guilty.

An accused have three options when defence is called - testifying from the witness dock, keep quiet or give an unsworn statement from the dock which could not be cross-examined.

"The court should consider Dr Mohd Osman's statement which was in conflict of Saiful. The Court of Appeal should give weight to Anwar's testimony in court.

"This amounts to serious misdirection which warrants the apex court intervention," said Surendran.

9.40am: Court in session with with Chief Justice Arifin presiding.

Some of those who are seated in the public gallery, including lawyers in their robes, are asked to leave the courtroom to make way for those with passes.

9.30am: Lead prosecutor Shafee arrives. In the public gallery, there is grumbling about there being not enough seats for everyone.

Also in the courtroom is Sepang MP Mohd Hanipa Maidin, who is also a lawyer. He is seen wearing the lawyer’s robe.

PKR vice-president and secretary-general Rafizi Ramli is also in the courtroom.

9.20am: The courtroom is already packed with those unable to get a seat being ushered out.
Anwar's lead counsel Gopal Sri Ram had indicated yesterday that he may be late and the other defence lawyers will make their submissions without him.

Lead prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah is expected to arrive soon. The proceedings are expected to start in 10 minutes.

8.57am: Anwar Ibrahim arrives in court with his wife, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and their children. He shakes hand with supporters as they pose for photographs.

Also seen with Anwar's family are defence lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya
8.50am: PKR vice-president and Batu MP Tian Chua speaks to the Anwar supporters gathered about 300 metres from the Palace of Justice. 
Tian says he had asked the police to allow them to gather in front of the court but they said no.

"Today, we are are much further away (than yesterday)," he laments.
The barricades have been moved further from the front of the Palace of Justice.

8.40am: Lawyers representing Anwar have started trickling in. Among them are Eric Paulsen, Sangeet Kaur Deo and Ram Karpal Singh.
Journalists are seated on the left side of the court while the international observers, who have started to arrive, are seated on the right.

The seats in the middle of the public gallery are allocated for Anwar's family members and supporters.

Yesterday, when the hearing opened, the courtroom was packed with about 80 people in the public gallery, including journalists, international observers and opposition supporters.

8.38am: Outside the Palace of Justice, some protesters attempt to break the barricades erected by the police.

They tried to topple the makeshift fence as they shouted “push, push”. About 50 police officers defend the barricades.

However, the situation came under control after Nik Nazmi urged the protesters to remain calm and not to break the barricades.

8.25am: About 300 people in red and black T-shirts, led by PKR leaders Nik Nazmi and Tian Chua, march from Tuanku Mizan mosque to the Palace of Justice about a stone's throw away.

They carry a banner bearing the words ‘Rakyat Hakim Negara’ (People are the judge of the nation) as well as ‘Justice for Anwar’ placards.

Meanwhile, another group of 200 supporters have gathered outside the court complex. The crowd size has grown to about 500.

8.20am: Already in the courtroom are deputy head of the prosecution division of the Attorney-General's Chambers Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria and Saiful's lawyer Zamri Idrus.

The court hearing is expected to start at 9.30am.

8.05am: Court staff arrive early and they go through the barricades opened by police at the back entrance of the sprawling court complex.

Some PKR and PAS politicians are already inside the building. They include Kelana Jaya MP Wong Chen, PAS vice-president Sallehuddin Ayub, PAS information chief and Pokok Sena MP Mahfuz Omar, Batu Buruk assemblyperson Syed Azman Syed Mohamad and former PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution Ismail.
8am: The number of supporters outside the Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin Mosque have swelled to 100. Among them are PKR Youth chief Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad and activists Hishamuddin Rais and Adam Adli.
Adam and four others are playing upbeat music to energise the early morning crowd.
Chants of 'Allahuakhbar', 'Reformasi' and 'Bebas Anwar' fill the air.
7.20am: Several dozen supporters of Anwar Ibrahim are gathering at the Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin Mosque across the road from the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya which housed the Federal Court - the country's highest court.
Among them are members of the Kelantan 'Royalti' NGO. Others have come from Kedah and Penang overnight via chartered buses.
Many are expecting a decision today although it is likely that proceedings may drag on for another day or so.

Like yesterday, there is heavy police presence and security is tight with key roads leading to the court complex barricaded.
7am: The final appeal against Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy conviction and five-year prison sentence and the prosecution's cross-appeal to extend the jail term meted out to the opposition leader will resume today at the Federal Court in Putrajaya.

Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria leads a five-member bench in the highly charged case, which is also closely watched by a number of international observers sitting in the public gallery of the packed courtroom.

The biggest surprise yesterday was the appointment of former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram who retired in 2010, to lead Anwar's defence team. He replaced senior lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah who has not fully recovered from his leg surgery.

The inclusion of 70-year-old Gopal in the defence team had resulted in the judges who are mostly his peers or juniors not to abruptly cut him off as they sometimes do with other lawyers, as he delivered points after points in attacking alleged victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's credibility as the key witness.

The defence is compelled to do this after the trial judge at the Kuala Lumpur High Court, Justice Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah, and a three-member bench at the Court of Appeal maintained that Saiful was a credible witness.

Among the points submitted by Gopal centred on the use of lubricant K-Y jelly during the alleged sex act, the alleged smearing of the gel on the carpet floor, Saiful's demeanour, and the possibility of impeaching the star witness for conflicts on the point of non-consensual and consensual sex.

Today, Anwar's counsel N Surendran will continue with his submissions in arguing that weightage should be given to the opposition leader's statement from the dock where he claimed of a political conspiracy against him.

This is followed by Ram Karpal Singh's submission on DNA evidence and then his sister Sangeet Kaur Deo's submission on evidence taken from Anwar's cell on July 16, 2008 to be tested for DNA.

This was after the PKR de facto leader refused to provide his DNA sample at Hospital Kuala Lumpur following allegations of tampering in Anwar’s first sodomy trial in 1998.

After the defence team has completed its submissions, it is government-appointed lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah’s turn to make his arguments. It is understood that Shafee's submissions is about 221 pages long.

The appeal may go longer than the two days initially allocated by the court to hear the case.

Shafee has mentioned in court yesterday that his prosecution team, which includes deputy head of the prosecution division of the Attorney-General’s Chambers Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria, is prepared for the trial to continue until Friday.

Malaysiakini is covering the hearing LIVE.