The Federal Court’s decision today to convict Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim of sodomy has set Malaysia back in terms of the rule of law and human rights, an international rights watchdog said today.
http://tinyurl.com/l6vdygu
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) claimed that the Opposition Leader’s right to a fair trial had been violated, including his legal right to be presumed innocent until the prosecution proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
“This decision is a clear setback to the rule of law in Malaysia and is incompatible with the principle of presumption of innocence,” the group wrote in a statement today, also saying that the country’s apex court had effectively adopted the Court of Appeal’s approach last year.
ICJ cited its commissioner Justice Elisabeth Evatt who said that the Court of Appeal appeared to have placed the burden on Anwar to prove he had a credible defence, instead of the typical burden to raise a reasonable doubt in the prosecution’s case.
Justice Evatt, a former Australian Federal Court judge, had observed the proceedings for Anwar’s case in both the Court of Appeal and Federal Court in 2013 and 2014.
Today, Justice Evatt claimed the Federal Court’s ruling allegedly showed Putrajaya as “once again inappropriately” using the offence under Section 377B of the Penal Code against its “political opponents”.
“This is deplorable, especially since Section 377B criminalises consensual same-sex relations, and thereby, violates a range of international law and standards, including on the rights to privacy, non-discrimination and equal protection,” Justice Evatt was quoted as saying in the same statement, referring to the colonial-era offence, which the ICJ had previously asked Malaysia to repeal.
The ICJ noted that this offence had long been abandoned in the UK, but remains in force in Malaysia as a relic of British law, further pointing out that it was only used against Anwar in the past few years.
Emerlynne Gil, another ICJ observer of the Federal Court hearings, similarly said that making consensual same-sex conduct a crime violates a list of human rights, including the right to dignity; liberty and security of person; opinion and expression.
“Anwar Ibrahim should never have been investigated, charged with, tried, let alone convicted of and sentenced for such charges,” the ICJ’s international legal adviser for Southeast Asia was quoted saying.
The Federal Court’s decision today to uphold an earlier Court of Appeal decision that reversed Anwar’s acquittal of sodomising former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhary Azlan effectively ends the opposition leader’s legal options to challenge the conviction.
With the Federal Court’s five-year jail sentence, Anwar now stands to lose his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat as the law bars anyone fined over RM2,000 or imprisoned more than one year from serving as a lawmaker, unless a free pardon is granted.
The decision also leaves the Pakatan Rakyat federal opposition pact without a leader.
http://tinyurl.com/l6vdygu
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) claimed that the Opposition Leader’s right to a fair trial had been violated, including his legal right to be presumed innocent until the prosecution proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
“This decision is a clear setback to the rule of law in Malaysia and is incompatible with the principle of presumption of innocence,” the group wrote in a statement today, also saying that the country’s apex court had effectively adopted the Court of Appeal’s approach last year.
ICJ cited its commissioner Justice Elisabeth Evatt who said that the Court of Appeal appeared to have placed the burden on Anwar to prove he had a credible defence, instead of the typical burden to raise a reasonable doubt in the prosecution’s case.
Justice Evatt, a former Australian Federal Court judge, had observed the proceedings for Anwar’s case in both the Court of Appeal and Federal Court in 2013 and 2014.
Today, Justice Evatt claimed the Federal Court’s ruling allegedly showed Putrajaya as “once again inappropriately” using the offence under Section 377B of the Penal Code against its “political opponents”.
“This is deplorable, especially since Section 377B criminalises consensual same-sex relations, and thereby, violates a range of international law and standards, including on the rights to privacy, non-discrimination and equal protection,” Justice Evatt was quoted as saying in the same statement, referring to the colonial-era offence, which the ICJ had previously asked Malaysia to repeal.
The ICJ noted that this offence had long been abandoned in the UK, but remains in force in Malaysia as a relic of British law, further pointing out that it was only used against Anwar in the past few years.
Emerlynne Gil, another ICJ observer of the Federal Court hearings, similarly said that making consensual same-sex conduct a crime violates a list of human rights, including the right to dignity; liberty and security of person; opinion and expression.
“Anwar Ibrahim should never have been investigated, charged with, tried, let alone convicted of and sentenced for such charges,” the ICJ’s international legal adviser for Southeast Asia was quoted saying.
The Federal Court’s decision today to uphold an earlier Court of Appeal decision that reversed Anwar’s acquittal of sodomising former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhary Azlan effectively ends the opposition leader’s legal options to challenge the conviction.
With the Federal Court’s five-year jail sentence, Anwar now stands to lose his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat as the law bars anyone fined over RM2,000 or imprisoned more than one year from serving as a lawmaker, unless a free pardon is granted.
The decision also leaves the Pakatan Rakyat federal opposition pact without a leader.
No comments:
Post a Comment