Check Najib’s passport, will ya?

UPDATE: Brilliant, isn’t it? PKR’s Latheefa Koya suggests that the police should check the passports of all three individuals, to determine if they were in Paris at the same time (for the french dinner for 3). The 3 are: DPM NAjib Tun Razak, Altantuya Shariibuu (murdered) and her accused murderer Abdul Razak Baginda.

Circumstantial evidence

“All this is circumstantial evidence. It doesn’t show that those in the photograph were involved in the murder. But since the deputy premier had denied any relationship, then it boils down to suspicion If there is no such photograph, let the public know. If there is none, it boils down to the testimony of the prosecution witness and she can be charged (for perjury),” she added.

The not-so-brilliant thing is: do you think they (police) have the guts to do it?

Especially when it seems that a relevant fraction of the police force is in one way or another allegedly related (involved) to this murder.

And by the way, WHERE IS THE BLOODY PHOTO???

On a similar note, Couldn’t resist posting this article (ALTANTUYA: JUSTICE ON TRIAL?) by KIM QUEK in Malaysiakini. He raises some pertinent questions:

An unbelievable spectacle took place in the bizarre murder trial of Mongolian national Altantuya in Day 10 (June 29).

When the family lawyer (Karpal Singh) of the murdered victim attempted to ask the deceased’s cousin a question regarding “a government official” photographed together with the deceased, prosecutor and defence lawyers sprang to their feet in unison to thwart the question.

This resulted in a shouting match, with Karpal Singh on one side, confronted by the combined forces of prosecutor and defence lawyers on the other.

On an earlier day (Day 7, June 26), a similar division of forces in the court occurred when a Mongolian witness told the court that the immigration entry computer records of the deceased and her two Mongolian companions (including the witness) had been mysteriously erased.

While Karpal Singh asked the court to take proper note of this highly irregular event, both prosecutor and defence lawyers objected to this evidence as irrelevant, and insisted that it be expunged.

Now, isn�t that a strange phenomenon? A prosecutor is supposed to seek justice for the deceased victim�s family against the murderers, so how come the prosecutor is now ganging up time and again with defence lawyers to oppose the victim�s family lawyer? Is this a case of prosecutor vs defence or a case of (prosecutor + defence) vs victim�s family?

Obviously, prosecutor and defence seem to have plenty of common interests which contradict those of the victim�s family.

What is that common interest?

The answer may lie in the identity of that �government official� that appeared in the photograph with Altantuya that both prosecutor and defence tried so hard not to allow its exposure.

On Day 10, Altantuya�s cousin Burmaa Oyunchimeg (photo) testified that after Altantuya returned from France, Altantuya went to Hong Kong to meet the witness, and showed the latter a photograph that shows Altantuya, her alleged lover Abdul Razak Baginda (the third accused) and �a government official� taking meal together.

Answering Karpal Singh later, after the shouting match in the court had subsided, she said this �government official� was Najib Razak. She could distinctly remember this name because it bears similarity to her cousin�s alleged lover�s name, and she even asked Altantuya whether they were brothers.

Burmaa further added that the photo had also been shown to Altantuya�s father.

Now, the revelation of Najib Razak in the photo would not have caused such a sensation if not for the Deputy Prime Minister�s oft repeated denial of any knowledge of Altantuya, including a public denial during the recent Ijok by-election, when even the name of Allah was invoked.

What does DPM Najib has to say now that his denial is directly contradicted by witness Burmaa?

His press secretary Tengku Sarifuddin Tengku Ahmad issued a brief statement on June 30 saying that the DPM declined to comment for two reasons.

One, any comment from Najib might be subjudice, since the case is on-going. Two, Najib had already repeatedly denied acquaintance with the girl in the past, �as such, the issue over the picture does not arise�.

What subjudice?

Subjudice to the case? That sounds ridiculous. How would a simple statement like �I have never had my photo taken with Altantuya� be subjudice? In fact, being the No 2 leader in the government, Najib is absolutely duty bound to the nation to say outright whether he was ever photographed with Altantuya, in view of the serious implication of Burmaa�s allegation.

The issue over the picture does not arise? Equally ridiculous. In fact, the opposite is true.

Precisely because of Najib�s past denials, it is all the more imperative that Najib must stand up now to clarify to the nation.

There is only one explanation for Najib�s past denials and his present silence � guilty conscience.

If Najib�s conduct with respect to the case has been above board, there is no reason whatsoever for him to deny acquaintance with a good friend�s (Razak Baginda) friend (Altantuya).

Similarly, if the allegation of the picture is false, it is inconceivable and totally incomprehensible and irresponsible that Najib should have chosen not to refute Burmaa�s allegation.

In fact, Najib was so worried about the publicity of the picture that his secretary called editors of the local press, and requested them not to blow up the issue. This has resulted in this explosive story staying clear of the headlines on the next day (June 30), and the name of �Najib Razak� not being identified as the DPM in Malay and English papers. (In one Chinese paper � Guang Ming � this Najib story hit the headline in the front page in the evening edition, but disappeared completely from it in the day edition next morning, June 30).

And of course, Anwar Ibrahim�s criticism of the trial and his specific call on Najib to clarify on the picture during a press conference was generally blacked out.

However, despite such suppression of news, irreversible damage is done. There is little doubt that Najib is deeply troubled and his political position seriously weakened.

That this murder case has been subjected to serious political manipulations is obvious from the very start when police commenced its highly questionable investigation, right through to the present trial stage when the conduct of prosecutor and defence lawyers appears increasingly dubious.

The over-riding mission

Instead of prosecutor seeking the truth and defence lawyers fighting to defend the accused as their prime objectives, both seemed to be pre-occupied with an over-riding mission � to prevent the whole truth from emerging.

Their combined efforts to cover up issues of immigration record erasure and identity of Najib in the picture are just two examples of such conduct.

The highly irregular nature of this case was also marked by frequent and mysterious changes of legal personnel, resulting in the complete change-over of defence lawyers, prosecutors and judge even before hearing began.

These weird phenomena were crowned by the shock appearance of a new team of prosecutors who were appointed only hours before the hearing was supposed to begin, thus necessitating an impromptu postponement of hearing for two weeks.

Under these circumstances, the public must brace themselves for more aberrant scenarios from this court, while Najib and his supporters may have to keep their fingers crossed in the long days ahead when many more witnesses have yet to walk through what must have appear to Najib as a minefield.

On a more serious note, this unseemly trial does not exactly add credit to our judicial system whose already wretched image has just been further mauled by the shameful finale of another sham trial � that of Eric Chia of Perwaja Steel fame.

After seven long years of investigations and three years of court hearing, the case was thrown out due to lack of prima facie evidence.

With that, the long drawn Perwaja Steel scandal saga is ended without finding any culprit for the mountain of losses (more than RM10 billion) suffered by the taxpayers.

There has been a spate of criminal cases being dismissed of late due to inadequate investigations and poor prosecution, indicating that the downward slide of our criminal justice system which gathered momentum in the Mahathir era has hastened its downtrend under Abdullah Badawi�s leadership.

With criminal justice system in shambles, rule of law is jeopardized. And that is an important benchmark to judge the efficacy of Abdullah�s administration vis-�-vis his reform agenda.