Thursday, July 10, 2008

Anwar Wants Sodomy Case Investigated Under Syariah

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) advisor Anwar Ibrahim has filed a complaint with the Federal Territory Islamic Affairs Department (Jawi) on what he claimed was slander by a former aide who has accused Anwar of sodomising him.

Anwar, who was companied by his wife Dr Wan Azizah Ismail and his lawyer Kamar Ainiah Kamaruzaman, lodged the complaint with the investigation unit of the Jawi Enforcement Division at the Jawi office at 10.15 am (Thursday, July 10).

He said he filed the complaint to have the accusation against him investigated under the Federal Territory Syariah Criminal Offences Act 1997, on the advice of several "ulama" (religious scholars) who had also advised him not to subject himself to "mubahalah" (malediction).

"I have lodged a complaint to seek to have the case brought to the Syariah Enforcement Division to clear my name and that of my family from the malicious and humiliating slander.

"It was on the advice of ulama that this matter has been brought (for investigation) under the "Qazaf" law and provision," he told reporters after lodging the complaint. (Qazaf means to wrongfully accuse a man or woman of adultery or homosexuality.)

Anwar's former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 23, lodged a report on June 28 at the Jalan Traverse police station accusing Anwar of having sodomised him, and was reportedly prepared to subject himself to malediction in the matter.

Anwar, when asked why he had sought to have the matter investigated under Syariah law, said: "I am not prohibiting the investigation under civil law. This is only to clear my name."

Anwar's lawyer, Kamar Ainiah, said her client had asked the Enforcement Division to expedite the investigation for an early decision to have the case brought to the Syariah Court.

She said Anwar wanted the case to be handled under Section 41 of the Federal Territory Syariah Criminal Offences Act 1997.

The section referred to Qazaf offences, and conviction would result in a jail term of three years or a fine of RM5,000 or both, she said.

Kamar Ainiah said Anwar wanted the matter to be referred to the Syariah Court because of the absence of a similar provision under civil law.

(source: Bernama)

14 comments:

NGINAP SRENGENGE said...

Kita orang Islam kena guna hukum Allah . Guna hukum dunia mungkin jatuh syirik....nauzubillah.

Kita akan diadili di akhirat dengan hukum Al-quran .Allah tak guna undang2 Malaysia,singapore,Afrika,England atau pun undang2 Amerika.Siapa kita sebenarnya ? hamba Allah atau hamba dunia ?

azy said...

Hukum apa. Charge Maksimum RM5,000 bukan sebat 80. Syariah ini lebih selamat untuk Saiful dan Anwar. Anytime boleh bayar.

Kalau mahkamah civil yg ada sekarang, kalau ada DNA dikira bukti yang kukuh. Dan hakim mahkamah Syariah juga boleh ambil kira DNA sebagai bukti kukuh. Dalam mahkamah Syariah ini banyak bergantung pada hakim. Maksud saya jika tak dapat kemukakan 4 saksi pun tak apa jika ada bukti kukuh yang meyakinkan.

Perkara pokok di sini keadilan.

Saudara srengenge kena fikir macam nak bypass english common law itu.

Anonymous said...

" you stupid FOOL, show your 4 witnesses ! now wait for my lawyer's letter & u shall have 'cold hands & feet', then go to his house & consult lah , FOOL"

Anonymous said...

there he goes trying to hookwink the nation again.

rule number 1 for all politicians... never answer the question.

so, quoting the Bernama report, "...Anwar, when asked why he had sought to have the matter investigated under Syariah law, said: "I am not prohibiting the investigation under civil law. This is only to clear my name..."

therein lies the proof of his guilt.

now, consider this:

if someone were to accuse you of a crime... what would be your natural reaction?

"I'm innocent!" or "I'm NOT guilty!"

however, in Anwar's case... "...This is only to clear my name..."

it's all about perception... never mind the guilt... Public Relations ala Americain.

makes you wonder where all the money came from to pay for all those favourable reports from the foreign media... "charismatic leader," "resurgent opposition," "de facto opposition leader," etc... it all becomes trite after a while.

so, the question is, why can't he be like normal people and say I'm innocent?

well, obviously he's NOT normal!

jokes aside, the reason he can't is found here

all the 10 judges, including the 2 who acquitted him, were convinced that he was indeed involved in homosexual activities... have you ever seen this mentioned by any foreign media? Could it be that news reporters/correspondents don't read court judgements? Could it be that news reporters/correspondents believe all our judges are corrupt? Why is PKR so set on discrediting our judiciary?

hence, it would be a good idea for the people working at J.A.W.I. to politely ask Anwar the question, "Why would someone accuse you of sodomizing him, have you ever been involved in any homosexual activities?"

finally, might I suggest all Muslims and Christians to read their Holy Books about Nabi Lot (a.s.)/Prophet Luth, especially, as to what happened to the prophet's wife.

may God bless us all... Amen.

p/s rule number 2 for politicians... never use religion to cover up your guilt.

theboldanon.

Anonymous said...

09.07.08 The Star Online
Anwar lodges report with FT religious dept against Saiful


KUALA LUMPUR: PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Wednesday lodged a report with the Federal Territory religious department against Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan for falsely accusing him of fornication.

This was in response to Saiful's police report, lodged on June 28, alleging Anwar had sodomised him at a condominium in Damansara.

Under Islamic Syariah Law, if Saiful fails to produce four witnesses to the alleged sodomy he can be found guilty and fined RM5,000 or jailed not more than three years, or both.

********************************************************************
Comment :

Of course you guys think I will attack the religious department
because they come out with this kind of requirement.
Guess what ? Not today.

Now, why is The Sodomist choose the religious department ?
Because he knew that when he sodomising his victim,
there were less than 4 witness enjoying the acts.
The Sodomist is saying " When I sodomised him, there was less than 4 witness -
therefore by this law, the victim cannot say it was a sodomy activities."

With this he is not only fighting for his innocence but also of the other RAPIST.
Who will do this kind of thing ? You know who.

(note 1)
So, to every rapist -
our Sodomist friend has given a green light
to rape his wife, his daughters and his granddaughter
just make sure there is no more then 3 persons watching.

Getting Deperate Mr.Sodomist ?
Trying to distract me ?
Well, ...why dont you try again.


~Leno~

Note 1 : is me being sarcastic.

Anonymous said...

He knows no one can ever produce four witnesses as required !
That is racist Anwar.

Anonymous said...

apa susuh sangat ..Orang Islam boleh bersumpah dengan nama Allah...dua dua sekali...tapi ingatlah balasan sekiranya berbohong ...sendiri tanggung lah...

Mahyudin said...

Kenapa Anwar tergesa2 sangat? Kalaupun rasa diri tu tak bersalah, jangan menampakkan diri tu desperate. Tunggu siasatan polis habis dulu, barulah nak bawa kes bawah Syariah.

donplaypuks® said...

The comments here are amazing.

Anonymous 1 says because Anwar knows the accusor cannot produce 4 witnesses, he is a racist! Huh?

There has been such a clamour, by even a CJ or two, for Syriah Laws to be applied in place of Civil Laws. Yet, when Anwar takes the Syariah route as ONE of his options, many Muslims condemn it. Which begs the question of who is the one who is championing Syariah Law in this country?

As for Saiful, he could not be so innocent about the fact that one has to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt in court. After all, he had ben 'advised' by the DPM b4 the event. That one should not accuse unless one has the evidence.

Also, the law of the land and of this World for the matter, whether Civil or Syariah, is that it is the accusor who has to prove his case first & not the innocent.

The last time Anwar gave the perfect alibi, he was beaten up, his diary confiscated and the AG then conveniently changed the date of the crime, not once, but twice!!

With that sort of experience behind him, should Anwar reveal his trump cards before hearing the full case and charges against him? Only an unmitigated fool would do it. and Anwar is not one, more so after his past experience.

As for Anonymous 2 and his parrotting of Dr.M's wothless, scurrilous comments that 10 judges believed Anwar had committed sodomy, this is sheer, utter nonsense. Why?

Any person has to go through the appeals process to prove his innocence. This means that b4 appearing at the Supreme Court 10 judges may have found Anwar guilty. But, it is the decision at the highest & final court of appeal that matters. If a person is found innocent there, then the decision of all those previous judges was wrong.

If we do not believe and accept this principle, than the Govt or any person must be regarded as GUILTY if they had WON at the Supreme Court, but more judges at the lower courts had thought them guilty. We will become the laughing stock of the world if we accept Dr.M's moronic reasoning.

As to the fact that some judges wrote they believed Anwar committed sodomy but found him innocent, this is the kind of stupidity you get when the appointment of judges is manipulated so that MERITOCRACY takes a back seat.

How can a judge say they he does not believe the 1 and only accusor, whose testimony was uncorrorborated and who committed khlawat while the trial was going on thereby making nonsense of his claims of higher moral ground, AND THEN SAY ANWAR COMMITTED SODOMY?

If the ONLY accusor's testimony cannot be believed, then Anwar is innocent. That is the law of the land, Tanah Ayer Ku! Yet, senior judges can write and speak from two orifices at the same time.

In any other country, these judges who wrote he is 'innocent but maybe guilty' would have been booted out of their jobs faster than you can say 'liwat!'

Now you know why halfthe judges in our country hae to be given a VSS nad the entire Judiciary revamped!

Make no mistake. The World is watching!!

harun said...

Saja je dia nak guna mahkamah syariah sebab tahu Saiful takkan boleh sediakan 4 orang saksi..Tiba2 pulak Anwar berminat dengan mahkamah syariah, dulu macam takda pun..

Qazaf dera mangsa rogol said...

hey pompuan bodoh...kenapa takde komen..Tak perasan ke undang2 taliban ada di Wilayah PErsekutuan. Kalau dikelantan atau trengganu tak heran tapi kenapa UMNO buat undang2 yang membolehkan pompuan Melayu..pompuan Melayu saj saya ulangi, di denda dan penjara kerana mengadu dirogol.

Tak peranjat qazah ada di wilayah persekutuan. LAgi satu kriminal law ni untuk orang melayu saja adalah unconstitutional walau konon atas nama Tuhan.

Melayu kenapa bodoh tak nampak isu yang sebenar.

Ya sekarang,,, mengadu lah dirogol..Kalau anda tidak dirogol depan empat lelaki yang berserban jangan harap aduan anda diterima.

SEbaliknya nah sebatan...bodohnya Melayu...

Kenapa qazaf ada di negara UMNO? Bahalul punya JAWI.

Kan peliwat dah guna untuk menakutkan mangsa dia...

Anonymous said...

hi, donplay... sure that fool was advised by dpm b4 the event
(26th) !?

Anonymous said...

without doubt donplaypuks is either Anwar in disguise or his boyfriend... but whoever he is... he must be utterly confused!

why?

well, first he wrote, "...But, it is the decision at the highest & final court of appeal that matters. If a person is found innocent there, then the decision of all those previous judges was wrong..."

my, oh my, isn't he the clever one.

but, then he wrote, "...In any other country, these judges who wrote he is 'innocent but maybe guilty' would have been booted out of their jobs faster than you can say 'liwat!'..."

now, not so clever and what was he thinking?

didn't he realise that he was condemning the 2 judges who actually acquitted Anwar?

meaning that if the 2 judges were to be given the boot, then Anwar would be guilty of sodomizing Azizan at the time/place mentioned in the charge.

gosh, talk about idiots... this guy takes the cake!

but, then again, when one donplaypuks then, it's obvious that one yesplaybontot.

for the uninitiated, the given link to the court judgement was by the 2 judges who actually acquitted Anwar.

so, stop trying to cloud the issue... this strategy has become a tad trite.

fool me once, shame on me, but, fool me twice, the shame is on you.

theboldanon.

Anonymous said...

Hey, WIVES, i mean married women : never...NEVER turn your head & LOOK
... run...run...for your life...pls
...PLEASE dun look back !!