Just prefer the charge and get on with it

Posted on August 1, 2008


Charge Anwar or Saiful.

With sodomy or for making a false police report, as the case may be.

What should not be done now is to ‘NFA’ ( no further action ) this whole business of ‘was he or wasn’t he sodomised?’.

To NFA the whole thing now would work an injustice to not only Anwar and Saiful, but a whole host of others who have been dragged into the public arena.

Saiful says he was sodomised by Anwar. Anwar says Saiful is a liar.

And we, the public, with tiny bits of information here and there mixed with a whole dose of speculation, have been conducting our own trial through cyberspace, in the coffeshops and in the marketplace.

We’ve read and heard all the theories that have been weaved and spun, to a point where it has slowly become difficult to sieve away fact from fiction.

And there has been collateral damage. The reputation of others have been questioned or maligned in the process.

The doctor at Pusrawi as well as those at KLH who examined Saiful, Najib who has been accused by Anwar of spearheading this whole business as part of a conspiracy to halt Anwar’s march to Putrajaya, the police who have been accused of working with those alleged conspirators, and even Uncle Pet, all now, in my view, have a legitimate stake in the truth emerging from a clean, open public trial in a court of law.

‘Is a clean public trial in a court of law possible?’, I can almost hear all of you screaming at me now.

Well the first sensible thing that has been done, I think, has been to entrust the scrutiny of the investigation papers to the Solicitor-General.

I don’t know the man myself, but those who do and whose judgment I trust, swear that the man is as straight as an arrow.

Malaysianinsider appears to have jumped the gun in reporting that the SG will lead the prosecution of Anwar.

I think the SG must first vet the papers to see if there is enough evidence to present a prima facie case.

And ordinarily, if he found the evidence in hand did not add up to a prima facie case, he would recommend ‘NFA’.

This case, however has been anything but ordinary and given the wide publicity that it has received, my sense is that justice would only be served to all parties concerned, the public included, if this matter does go to trial.

Either a on a sodomy or false police report charge.

To decide not to charge Anwar due to insufficiency of evidence would be an injustice to the man in that it implies that there is some evidence of sodomy, yet insufficient to convict, without then offering to Anwar the public forum to tear to shreds the little evidence that is insinuated is in the hands of prosecutors.

It would be unjust to Saiful as it would leave hanging in the air the lingering question whether a ‘NFA’ decision was to conveniently cover up a botched up conspiracy as alleged by Anwar. Unless Saiful is then charged with making a false police report.

And such a trial, if managed competently and proceeded upon with the urgency it warrants, should conclude inside of a month and finally sift the fact from the fiction that is now fast clouding the real issue.

Did Anwar sodomise Saiful, or did Saiful lie?

‘Yes, but would the trial be clean and fair?’, I can hear all of you ask again.

Well, this time you and I, the public, will be watching closely.

And they know it.

Posted in: Right to know