On 27 May 1999, the Defence filed a Notice of Alibi proving that the alleged scene of the crime, Tivoli Villa, had not been completed yet, so it would have been impossible to have sodomised Azizan in that place in May 1992. And Azizan had testified he will never forget, as long as he lives, that it had occurred in the Tivoli Villa.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
The Trial Judge may be linked to the PM’ son; but this is not conflict of interest
The AG, Abdul Gani Patail, kicked of the morning by bringing to the court’s attention the Defence’s application to disqualify the trial judge, Ariffin Jaka, due to conflict of interest.
In 1990, the judge was both a director and shareholder in a company, Dataprep Holdings Sdn Bhd, that was owned by the Prime Minister’s son, Mirzan Mahathir.
“Dataprep and Mirzan Mahathir are not parties to the proceedings,” said the AG. “Neither are they an issue in this trial.”
“Therefore, there cannot be any question or any real likelihood of bias on the part of the learned judge.”
“The only common factor between the learned judge and the Prime Minister’s son is that they were Directors of Dataprep up to 1990.”
“It is grossly inadequate and manifestly unsafe to allege bias on the part of the learned judge by relying on this loose association of facts.”
“It is far too remote to even suggest that such circumstances could give rise to a real danger of bias on the part of the learned judge when he heard this case.”
Time may be the essence, but it is not important
On 29 September 1998, Anwar and Sukma were charged for sodomising Azizan ‘one night in the month of May 1994’. Soon after, their trial started, and the ‘victim’, who is also the Prosecution’s star witness, testified that he was never sodomised after May 1992.
On 27 April 1999, the charges were amended to ‘one night in the month of May 1992’.
The Defence claims that this amendment was to match Azizan’s testimony. The Prosecution however, says that the ‘1994’ date was a typographical error and that the real date should have actually been ‘1992’ - therefore the need for the amendment.
On 27 May 1999, the Defence filed a Notice of Alibi proving that the alleged scene of the crime, Tivoli Villa, had not been completed yet, so it would have been impossible to have sodomised Azizan in that place in May 1992. And Azizan had testified he will never forget, as long as he lives, that it had occurred in the Tivoli Villa.
So, on 7 June 1999, the charges were amended, yet again, to read ‘one night between the months of January to March 1993, at or about 7.45pm’. In the meantime, Azizan changed his testimony to say that the sodomy did in fact occur way past May 1992, and not as he had earlier testified.
Yesterday, the Prosecution said that the date may be hazy, but the place still remains the same - and that’s all that counts.
Dates are important only in specific cases, said the Prosecution. In the case of Anwar’s and Sukma’s sodomy trial, dates are not that crucial.
“From time immemorial, dates have never been important in an indictment,” said the AG.
However, because of the amendment to the date in the charge, the earlier Notice of Alibi filed was no longer valid. It was an alibi to contest the ‘May 1992’ charge. It would not support the ‘one night between the months of January to March 1993, at or about 7.45pm’ charge.
So the Defence asked for a postponement of 12 days to file a fresh Notice of Alibi. But the Trial Judge turned down this request.
“The learned trial judge finally ruled, shortly before the trial finally commenced on 16 June 1999, that the second appellant need not file a fresh Notice of Alibi, and ordered that the trial was to commence without any further postponements,” said the Prosecution.
Translated into BM by Jason:
HARI 7 - 8 APRIL 2003 (bahagian 2)
Pada 27 Mei 1999, Pembelaan mengemukakan Notis Alibi bagi membuktikan bahawa lokasi yang dikatakan tempat kejadian, iaitu Tivoli Villa, belum pun siap dibina. Jadi, adalah mustahil Anwar meliwat Azizan di situ pada Mei 1992. Dalam hal ini, Azizan pula berkata bahawa selama dia hidup, dia takkan lupa bahawa kejadian itu berlaku di Tivoli Villa.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Hakim perbicaraan mungkin ada kaitan dengan anak PM, tetapi ini bukanlah percanggahan kepentingan
Peguam Negara, Abdul Gani Patail memulakan hujahnya dengan memberitahu mahkamah mengenai permohonan Pembelaan untuk menyingkirkan hakim perbicaraan, Ariffin Jaka atas alasan konflik kepentingan.
Pada tahun 1990, hakim itu adalah pengarah dan juga pemegang saham sebuah syarikat, Dataprep Holdings Sdn Bhd, yang dimiliki oleh anak Perdana Menteri, Mirzan Mahathir.
"Dataprep dan Mirzan Mahathir bukanlah pihak yang terbabit dalam prosiding ini,” kata AG. "Mereka juga tiada kena-mengena dalam perbicaraan ini.”
"Oleh itu, tidak boleh ada persoalan ataupun kemungkinan berat sebelah yang nyata di pihak hakim yang arif."
"Satu-satunya faktor umum antara hakim dan anak Perdana Menteri adalah mereka adalah Pengarah Dataprep hingga tahun 1990."
"Adalah sangat tidak memadai dan nyata tidak selamat bagi menuduh pertimbangan berat sebelah di pihak hakim yang arif, yakni dengan bergantung pada perkaitan fakta yang longgar ini.”
"Malah adalah tidak berpatutan bagi mengisyaratkan bahawa keadaan seperti itu dapat menimbulkan bahaya berat sebelah yang nyata di pihak hakim yang arif ketika dia mendengar kes ini."
Waktu mungkin menjadi pokok persoalan, tetapi ia tidak penting
Pada 29 September 1998, Anwar dan Sukma didakwa meliwat Azizan pada 'suatu malam pada bulan Mei 1994'. Tidak lama kemudian, perbicaraan mereka bermula dan ‘mangsa’ yang juga saksi utama Pendakwa memberikan keterangan bahawa dia tidak pernah diliwat selepas Mei 1992.
Pada 27 April 1999, pertuduhan itu telah diubah kepada 'satu malam pada bulan Mei 1992'.
Pembelaan mendakwa bahawa pindaan itu dilakukan supaya pertuduhan selari dengan keterangan Azizan. Namun begitu, Pendakwa mengatakan bahawa tarikh '1994' adalah disebabkan kesalahan tipografi, dan bahawa sepatutnya, tarikh yang sebenar adalah '1992' – jadi, pindaan itu perlu dilakukan.
Pada 27 Mei 1999, Pembelaan mengemukakan Notis Alibi bagi membuktikan bahawa lokasi yang dikatakan tempat kejadian, iaitu Tivoli Villa, belum pun siap dibina. Jadi, adalah mustahil Anwar meliwat Azizan di situ pada Mei 1992. Dalam hal ini, Azizan pula berkata bahawa selama dia hidup, dia takkan lupa bahawa kejadian itu berlaku di Tivoli Villa.
Jadi, pada 7 Jun 1999, pertuduhan itu sekali lagi dipinda, iaitu kepada 'satu malam antara bulan Januari dan Mac 1993, pada atau sekitar jam 7:45 malam'. Sementara itu, Azizan menukar keterangannya, yakni bahawa dia masih diliwat selepas Mei 1992, dan bukannya sebagaimana keterangannya sebelum itu.
Pada hari sebelumnya, Pendakwa berkata bahawa tarikhnya mungkin kabur, tetapi tempat kejadian tetap sama - dan hanya itu yang penting.
Kata Pendakwa, tarikh hanya penting hanya dalam kes-kes tertentu. Dalam perbicaraan liwat Anwar dan Sukma, tarikh tidaklah begitu penting.
"Sejak zaman-berzaman, tarikh tidak pernah penting dalam pendakwaan," kata Peguam Negara.
Namun disebabkan tarikh dalam pertuduhan dipinda, maka Notis Alibi yang difailkan sebelum itu tidak lagi sah. Ini kerana ia adalah alibi bagi mencabar pertuduhan 'April 1992'. Ia tidak dapat digunakan bagi mencabar pertuduhan 'satu malam antara bulan Januari dan Mac 1993, pada atau sekitar jam 7:45 malam'.
Dengan demikian, Pembelaan memohon penangguhan 12 hari bagi mengemukakan Notis Alibi yang baru. Tetapi hakim perbicaraan menolak permintaan ini.
"Tidak lama sebelum perbicaraan bermula pada 16 Jun 1999, hakim yang arif memutuskan bahawa perayu kedua tidak perlu mengemukakan Notis Alibi yang baru, dan mengarahkan bahawa perbicaraan akan bermula tanpa sebarang penangguhan lanjut," kata Pendakwa.
No comments:
Post a Comment