Anwar files appeal against 5-year jail for sodomy

0

PUTRAJAYA: Opposition chief Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim filed a petition of appeal against his five-year jail sentence for sodomy at the Federal Court Registrar’s Office yesterday citing 35 grounds why his conviction and sentence should be set aside.

The appeal was filed by counsel Zaleha Al-Hayat, an assistant of the late Karpal Singh at 2pm, an hour before the deadline for appeal ended.

In the grounds of appeal, Anwar’s counsel had stated that the panel of judges of the Appeals Court was misdirected when it concluded that two DNA experts from Australia, Dr David Lawrence Wells and Dr Brian Mcdonald who appeared for the defence, were not competent witnesses.

“It was clear the Appeals Court judges failed to understand the explanation, especially of SD (Defence Witness) 4 (Dr Brian) who clearly was competent.

“There was ample evidence that SD4 did monitor his subordinate who performed the analysis and was definitely competent in the analyis performed,” explained the defence counsel.

In the grounds of judgement dated April 14, the panel of judges, headed by Justice Datuk Balia Yusof Wahi, had stated that both the experts (Dr Wells and Dr McDonald) were only armchair experts (experts who are only clever at theorising) compared to the prosecution’s chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong and Nor Aidora Saedon’s evidence, which was based on facts and analysis on the samples they carried out.

In the petition of appeal, the defence stressed that the panel of judges misdirected themselves in terms of the law because they did not delve into the evidence of Dr Brian deeply as the expert had been successful in creating serious doubt on the decision on the analysis made by Dr Seah and Nor Aidora.

The defence claimed that there were doubts as to whether the samples analysed by Dr Seah (SP5) were those collected by three doctors at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital after the victim, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, lodged a police report on the sodomy incident.

They claimed there were serious doubts on the DNA of ‘Male Y’ based on evidence from Dr Seah and Nor Aidora.

The defence further claimed that the appellant (Anwar) had the right to give his evidence from the dock but the comments of the panel in its judgement clearly showed that the judges were overly prejudiced towards the appellant.

“The judges had misdirected themselves seriously in drawing an inference against the accused over his decision not to call alibi witnesses,” claimed the defence in the grounds of appeal.

They further contended that the panel’s findings on the samples extracted from the anus of the accused raised serious doubts because of the process of degradation.

The defence also raised the issue of the breakdown in the chain of evidence which was not taken into account at the Appeals Court when their request to recall the investigating officer of the case Supt Jude Blacious Pereira was dismissed.

On March 7, the Appeals Court overturned the decision of the High Court on Jan 9, 2012 which freed Anwar from a charge of sodomising Mohd Saiful, 26, at a unit of the Desa Damansara condominium in Bukit Damansara between 3.10pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.

The Appeals Court sentenced Anwar to five years’ jail but stayed the sentence on RM10,000 bail in one surety pending appeal to the Federal Court. — Bernama