Friday, 7 November 2014


by: Scott Ng and Pamela Victor

Gobind Singh and Sangeet Kaur make their final submissions in Anwar's appeal.

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court was told today to reject circumstantial evidence in deciding on Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal against conviction on the charge of sodomy.
After lunch, counsel Sangeet Kaur Deo continued the defence’s closing submissions, which were mainly on the unidentified DNA found in Saiful Bukhari’s rectum and on the items used by Anwar in the lock-up.

The rebuttals concluded that there was nowhere in the cell that Anwar could have brushed his teeth despite the prosecution’s assertion that there were sounds of brushing. Deputy Public Prosecutor Shafee Abdullah then told the court, “Maybe he used a pipe to brush his teeth” but since it was a ”maybe”, Sangeet reiterated that there was no factual evidence to prove the assertion.

She told the court the prosecution was relying on circumstantial evidence to say that Anwar was Male Y. “This court must reject accepting circumstantial evidence when there is direct evidence,” she said.

She also said that it could have been the DNA of the person who packed the toothbrush and towel into a bag before giving it to Anwar.

Sangeet told the court that the manner in which the samples from the cell were obtained was unfair, and that the Investigating Officer had acted wrongly in arresting Anwar. Along with a lack of consent from Anwar for the gathering of samples, Sangeet said that Anwar was not told of the reason for his arrest, which is against Article 5 (3) of the Federal Constitution.

Gobind Singh then took over the closing submissions and said that the defence had proven the DNA samples were tampered with by a third person’s DNA, which was identified as Allele 18.

He said that Allele 18 did not come from Anwar or Saiful, adding that it proved that somebody else had access to the lock-up or the toothbrush and two other items – a towel and a water bottle. “What does scientific evidence show, My Lords? It shows that Allele 18 is present, that someone else was there. My Lords, Allele 18 proves that Saiful is lying.”

He then criticized Shafee for sounding more like a defence lawyer in posing more questions than providing answers before addressing the legality of the samples taken from Anwar’s cell.

“In questions of illegality, the court has the discretion to exclude evidence improperly or unfairly obtained,” he said, mentioning that the trial judge had found trickery and deception in how the samples were obtained.

“Male Y is not Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim and I apply for this conviction to be set aside,” he said.


No comments:

Post a Comment