Anwar Ibrahim’s statement from the dock on a conspiracy to oust him from politics could not be given any weightage by the Kuala Lumpur High Court and the Court of Appeal. His statement could not be cross examined thus it could not be verified.
However, defense team is relying on that shred of hope for consideration that Anwar had denied. The defense lawyer can only be blamed for his testimony from the dock has no value. He has never denied in court.
4.40pm: Hearing resumes with defence co-counsel N Surendran saying that the evidence of a pre-arranged plan refers to a conspiracy theory.
The lawyer says this was mentioned in the High Court and Court of Appeal but it was not evaluated.
Except for one paragraph referred in the Court of Appeal judgment, there is no mention of the conspiracy theory.
Surendran says that similarly in the High court judgment, there is only one paragraph cited.
"Saiful admitted that he went to meet Najib at his residence on June 24, 2008. He first met (then deputy prime minister's advisor) Khairil Annas."He also met (police senior assistant commissioner) Mohd Rodwan later that day.
"The meeting happened two days before the incident. Saiful contacted then IGP Musa Hassan."
He says that Saiful also had a series of meetings before lodging his report, including with now BN senator Ezam Mohd Nor and former national athlete Mumtaz Jaafar on June 27, 2008.
Surendran says Saiful met Rodwan in a hotel room on June 24, 2008 after the policeman called and then he met Najib.
"The meeting did not take place in the lobby. Is it probable or not there is a pre-arranged plan?" the lawyer submits.
The pre-arranged plan was also brought up by Anwar in his statement from the dock, says the lawyer.
"These are not innocent meetings but a pre-arranged plan," he adds.
4.55pm: Surendran further says Anwar's statement from the dock only strengthen his claim of a conspiracy against him.
"The complainant was a drop-out and used (this) to achieve a devious end.
"This confirms that there was a pre-arranged plan. Statement from the dock is evidence only the weightage is less," he says.
5pm: Looking at the Court of Appeal judgment, Surendran (left) says there were adverse comments made which led to the wrong finding.
"Anwar has explained why he was giving an unsworn statement from the dock. There is a web of lies depicted. Anwar says he could not get justice in the present case," he adds.
Justice Suriyadi asks if Anwar is stating that he has no faith in the courts.
Surendran replies that there was a series of decisions made by the judiciary which went against Anwar.
5.10pm: Surendran says there was misdirection by the Court of Appeal.
To a question by Justice Abdull Hamid, he says the High Court judge did not evaluate Anwar's statement from the dock.
As such, Surendran says there is serious error in Court of Appeal's decision, in describing Anwar's statement as a mere denial.
"What the High court judge did not say it was mere denial. The Appellate court was wrong to say it was mere denial. This is not a syntax error."
Extracted from Malaysiakini
No hope there
No comments:
Post a Comment