Zaid Ibrahim is Crawling on his knees for survival to a level of amnesia while disregarding his past fight for Human Rights and Civil Liberties. He now plays the game of the Masses, "Morality."
KUALA LUMPUR, March 16 — PKR accused Datuk Zaid Ibrahim today of stooping to the level of Malay rights group Perkasa by asking Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to surrender his DNA samples in Sodomy II.
Party communications director Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad reminded his former political comrade that Anwar and his defence team’s refusal to hand in the samples was not only because they were not legally obligated to but because they were wary of the integrity of the system. He pointed out that Zaid too had once agreed the case was a “manufactured allegation” by the Barisan Nasional government when he was still in the party, and questioned his sudden about-turn.
“Anwar’s and Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) position is that this case is a manufactured allegation aimed at killing him off politically. “In Zaid’s short sojourn with Keadilan (PKR), he enthusiastically advocated the position and appears to be now having a bout of amnesia,” Nik Nazmi wrote in a statement today.
The Seri Setia assemblyman also charged that Zaid, now the president of newfound party KITA, was no different than groups like Perkasa and Gerakan Anti-Penyelewengan Selangor (GAPS), both of which are BN-friendly.
The groups had staged protests on Sunday outside PKR’s headquarters, demanding that Anwar surrendered his DNA samples to the prosecution in the ongoing trial.
“It is unfortunate that Zaid Ibrahim has to stoop down to the level of Perkasa and GAPS in continuing his vendetta against Anwar,” said Nik Nazmi.
He was responding to a statement from Zaid yesterday urging Anwar to surrender his DNA samples to prove his innocence and gain credibility.
The maverick politician had predicted that such an act would help Anwar achieve a better moral standing as the public would find it hard to accept a leader who refused to furnish “facts that can clear his name”.
But Nik Nazmi explained today Anwar and his defence team’s refusal to submit the samples had been due to their suspicion of the sodomy charges as the case appeared to be frought with inconsistencies and questionable practices.
“Since day one, the case against Anwar has been littered with numerous contradictions and flaws, and clearly if the defendant is not Anwar Ibrahim the case would have been thrown out of court,” he said.
He dubbed as dubious how the prosecution in the case has been “adamantly” refusing all requests from the defence to be provided with full details, date and samples of the DNA testing performed on samples taken from the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s, clothing. “Zaid as a lawyer ought to know that this is contrary to all established protocols on DNA testing and which would have automatically excluded the evidence in any fair trial.
“Such a refusal makes it impossible for the defence and the court to independently verify the integrity of the testing and only serves to reinforce the view that the prosecution have something important to hide about the so-called DNA testing,” he said.
As such, added Nik Nazmi, it would have been a “mockery of justice” for Anwar to provide a DNA sample as it would merely serve to assist the prosecution in affirming a “fabricated” result. He also reminded Zaid that senior policeman Rodwan Mohd Yusof, whom Saiful had admitted meeting twice before the alleged offence took place, was the same man who had purportedly removed Anwar’s DNA in his first sodomy charge in 1998.
“And it was planted on the infamous mattress to implicate the former deputy prime minister (Anwar),” he said. Another unanswered mystery in Sodomy II, said Nik Nazmi, was the discovery of other male DNA’s in Saiful’s rectum.
“At the same time, investigating officer Jude Pereira admitted that he did not store swabs taken from Saiful in a freezer, thus exposing the DNA to degradation. “The issue of why Jude kept the samples for 48 hours purportedly in a filing cabinet instead of handing them over to the chemist immediately is not satisfactorily explained,” he said.
Nik Nazmi also reminded Zaid that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak himself appeared to be instrumental in the “manufactured” trial, when the latter raised eyebrows after he had to retract his denial at having met Saiful two days before he claimed he was sodomised.
He added that even medical reports from both the Pusrawi and Kuala Lumpur Hospital had indicated that no penetration had taken place, thus giving rise to the suspicion that the prosecution’s intent in obtaining Anwar’s DNA was to ensure it was present in Saiful to prove their case.
“But since their case has been crumbling, it is clear that success is measured merely at casting doubt at Anwar’s moral standing even should the court finds him innocent,” he said. Nik Nazmi added that with all the questions surrounding the case, it was hard to believe that Zaid, a trained lawyer aware of the state of the country’s judiciary after the 1988 crisis, had suddenly placed his trust in the system.
He also accused Zaid of being ignorant of PAS’ ideologies as well as basic Islamic principles when the latter questioned the Islamist party’s silence on Anwar’s case, pointing out that Islam law states that “no one can be convicted without the testimony of four credible and fair witnesses”.