THE QUESTION IS: WHY IS NAJIB SO MAD IF RPK WANTS TO SEND ALTANTUYA’S  
MURDERERS TO HELL???

The first salvo from Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad, Press  
Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has isued a  
press statement with regards to Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s post on  
Altantuya (below). Raja Petra has replied ( see full statement inside):

I would like to refer to an article posted on your website under the  
heading “Let’s Send the Altantuya Murderers to Hell ” on April 25. For  
the benefits of your readers, I would to like to put the record  
straight since there were insinuations and unjustified comments made  
against the Deputy Prime Minister Dato Sri Mohd Najib Tun Razak and  
his wife Datin Sri Rosmah Mansor in respect of the murder case.
2. The article alleged that the DPM and his wife were implicated in  
the murder of the Mongolian girl, the Deputy Prime Minister supported  
her visas application, her immigration record had been erased and  
there were pictures taken with her. These are hearsays which you have  
deemed alright to published as reflected by your position “we too have  
conducted our own trial by court of public opinion and we have already  
arrived at our verdict”.

3. The article also gave the impression that police investigation was  
flawed and the legal proceeding was being compromise (show trial in  
the kangaroo court) and designed to hide the real perpetrators. While  
it is up to the judiciary and police to deal with these allegations,  
Dato Sri Mohd Najib reserved the right in this “public opinion” court  
to reiterate his earlier comments that he did not know and has never  
met the deceased. As such all these allegations are unfounded and  
designed to tarnish his standing within the Malaysian public.

4. A witness claimed that Altantuya had dinner with Razak and Najib  
was never corroborated. No picture was produced in court except that  
of PKR Information Chief Tian Chua who posted a concocted ‘picture’ on  
the web. Strangely, no legal attempt had been made to produce this  
picture as evidence in court to date by PKR as it appears it is only  
admissible in the public opinion court.

5. The case is a private matter involving Encik Razak Baginda and how  
the policemen were involved will come out in the open during the court  
proceedings. I would like to also point out that the claims that  
Altantuya murder was linked to the country’s purchase of the submarine  
as baseless and unfounded, it was done to make a good and believable  
story in the public opinion court.

6. Dato Sri Mohd Najib has been very restrained and guarded in making  
any public statement on the matter since people known to him have been  
implicated and have been charged in court. It could be misinterpreted  
or seen interfering in the case since the court proceedings is on  
going. In fact, a former Deputy Prime Minister was convicted for abuse  
of power when trying to suppress a sexual misconduct investigations  
against him.

7. As pointed out in the article there is an issue of subjudice or  
contempt of court and Dato Sri Mohd Najib, Malaysians and foreigners  
here must respect the laws and system that all of us are subject too.  
As such it is unfair that unfounded and wild allegations in such a  
serious matter had been made which will tarnish the Deputy Prime  
Minister’s standing in public.

8. As stated in your article “But this is not about politics and  
should not be dealt as such”, the DPM also shared this sentiment that  
this case should seek out the truth and justice should be served.  
However, it is clear that there are those who are not interested in  
finding justice for Altantuya. It is the politics of Altantuya they  
are concerned with and it is my sincere hope that your readers will be  
able to differentiate between truth, half-truth, falsehood and lies  
since politicians are judge in the public opinion court.

9. Since the allegations are serious and damaging in nature, the DPM  
will not hesitate to seek legal redress on the matter.

Below is Raja Petra’s courageous reply:

Dear Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad,
First of all, thank you for writing to Malaysia Today. (Read letter  
here). As promised, I have published your letter in toto without any  
amendments, additions, deletions, or ‘touch up’, though I felt some  
improvement to the language may have been necessary. Nevertheless, I  
was very careful in not ‘doctoring’ any parts of your letter lest I  
open myself to accusations of any sort.

I must admit I am pleased and honoured that the Press Secretary of the  
Deputy Prime Minister and likely future Prime Minister would take the  
trouble to write to Malaysia Today. As I have said so many times in  
the past, the only way to deal with the independent media is to engage  
it, not ignore it, for you ignore it at your own peril. And note that  
I have used the term ‘independent’ media and not ‘alternative’ media  
or ‘opposition’ media — because that is exactly what we are. In fact,  
what you call the ‘mainstream’ media, today, could actually be called  
the alternative media.

Now, on the points in your letter. A ‘trial’ by court of public  
opinion has been what we, the Rakyat, have had to rely on since 1998.  
Some say that the judiciary has in fact been compromised since 1988  
after the sacking of Tun Salleh Abbas and his fellow judges. The fact  
that these half a dozen or so judges were recently honoured in a  
dinner graced by the Prime Minister where Abdullah Ahmad Badawi  
announced that the government will spend millions of the taxpayers’  
money to pay these judges their 20 years back-pay confirms that the  
Abdullah government, in which Dato Sri Mohd Najib Tun Razak is part  
of, agrees with the court of public opinion’s view of events that  
happened 20 years ago.

This opinion is of course strengthened by your very own de facto Law  
Minister’s statement, barely a few days after taking office, that the  
government should apologise to Tun Salleh and his fellow judges. This  
was of course shot down by the Cabinet, and instead of an apology,  
they are being paid millions of Ringgit, which Najib said should not  
be interpreted as an apology. Maybe Najib is right when he says that  
if the government pays out millions of Ringgit of the taxpayers’ money  
this should be only taken as 20 years back-pay and not be taken as an  
apology. Nevertheless, this still tantamount to an admission that the  
judges had been wrongfully dismissed, apology or no apology.

We must also not forget the statement by Justice Kamil when he  
delivered his judgement in the Likas election petition case. Yang Arif  
admitted that he always receives instructions from the top before he  
delivers his judgement on important or crucial cases. Justice Kamli  
also said that he is not the only judge to receive such instructions  
but that many other judges are also subjected to interference and  
instructions from the top and that they are told how they should rule.  
When asked who this person from the top is, he replied that we should  
know whom it is he means and he left it at that. No one had any  
misgivings as to whom Justice Kamil meant.

One very respected retired Chief Justice, who is known as an extremely  
straight and no-nonsense chap, remarked, if he had to be tried in  
court, he would not like it to be in a Malaysian court. He further  
remarked that the windscreens of the cars of judges are blacked-out  
not for security reasons but because the judges are ashamed to be seen  
by the public. This is coming from someone who is placed above normal  
men and when someone of that calibre makes such statements how can the  
public not feel that the Malaysian judiciary can no longer be trusted?  
As they say, let you be judged by your peers, and the judiciary’s  
peers have made their ruling.

Dear Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad,

To argue that we should leave this matter to the courts to decide is  
just not on. It can never be on until we see genuine and real reforms  
in the judiciary. And when the talk amongst legal circles is that, in  
September, the President of the Court of Appeal will take over as the  
new Chief Justice, this just erodes our confidence in the judiciary  
even further. Putting Umno’s lawyer in charge of the judiciary is like  
putting the fox in charge of the henhouse or, as the Malays would say,  
putting the kambing in charge of the sireh. And you want us to leave  
it to the courts to decide? When you have highly-respected judges and  
retired Chief Justices openly condemning the Malaysian judiciary what  
do you expect the lesser-learned Rakyat like us to do?

Of course, you will say that one is innocent until proven guilty. That  
is a beautiful concept. However, if you believe such a thing is  
possible in Malaysia, then you probably believe in the Tooth Fairy and  
Santa Claus as well. Do you remember Anwar Ibrahim’s trial ten years  
ago? Anwar was tried in a court of public opinion when they paraded  
that mattress in and out of court every day. What happened to that  
mattress? It was never part of the evidence and eventually just  
quietly disappeared out of sight. Was that not grandstanding for the  
media and TV cameras?

In Anwar’s case, he was not innocent until proven guilty. Though the  
Malaysian judicial system, which follows the British and not the  
French system, stipulates that a man is innocent until proven guilty,  
Anwar was assumed guilty and he was made to prove his innocence. The  
onus should be on the court to prove guilt but in Anwar’s case he was  
considered guilty and he had to prove his innocence. And the judge  
sent Anwar to jail because, according to the judge, Anwar had failed  
to prove his innocence.

We are therefore using the same ‘burden of proof’ on the present  
Deputy Prime Minister just like what the previous Deputy Prime  
Minister was subjected to. If this system of ‘prove you are innocent  
or else we have to assume you are guilty’ was good enough for Anwar  
then it is certainly good enough for Najib. Why should there be  
different standards between one Deputy Prime Minister and another?  
Should there not be one standard for all?

Note that Malaysia has a law called the Internal Security Act. When  
you are detained under this law, you are assumed guilty until you can  
prove you are innocent. And if you fail to prove your innocence then  
you are detained without trial indefinitely. Some Malaysians have  
spent more than 20 years under detention because the hapless person  
was not able to prove his innocence. Ahmad Boestaman, the famous Malay  
nationalist and independence fighter, was detained for 14 years or so.  
You may remember him. His son, Rustam Sani, died recently.

Dear Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad,

I must remind you that I too was arrested on Hari Raya Haji Day in  
2001 after I walked into the police station to be with my wife who had  
earlier been arrested. Her ‘crime’ was for trying to help an old woman  
who had a knee injury and who was struggling to walk up a hill. The  
police arrested my wife, the poor old woman, and her daughter.

When I walked into the police station, Bakri Zinin, the current CID  
Director, assaulted me when I attempted to step outside to make a  
phone call. I was trying to step outside because a policeman shouted  
at me that I am not allowed to make a phone call inside the police  
station. But when I tried to step outside as instructed, Bakri  
assaulted me. He then instructed his officers to arrest me.

When I asked what my crime was and as to the reason I was being  
arrested, they told me they will think of something later. In the  
meantime they will arrest me first. I then insisted I be allowed to  
make a police report against Bakri but they refused to take my report.  
When I refused to accept no for an answer, they reluctantly took my  
report but nothing further was done after that. That police report  
made on Hari Haji Day of 2001 is probably no longer in the file.

Dear Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad,

I am glad you talk about respect for the law. I just wish you and  
Najib had said the same thing when they beat me up, handcuffed me, and  
threw me into the lockup without a charge back in 2001. Will I be  
accorded justice as well just like how you and Najib want to see  
justice done? Will Bakri Zinin be taken to task for beating me and for  
arresting me without any charge? Thus far, the only action taken  
against him is that he has been promoted from OCPD Dang Wangi to  
Director CID. Let us talk about justice when I see justice done to me  
as well. Until then we shall rule by law of public opinion, as that  
appears to be the only ‘system’ available to us.

I understand the concept of subjudice when commenting on an ongoing  
trial. So allow me to comment only on what the mainstream newspapers  
have already covered. The mainstream newspapers reported about a green  
Suzuki Vitara. The registration plate of the car was also mentioned in  
that newspaper report. Malaysia Today traced the owner of this car to  
an address in Ijok. On further checking with the SPR registration, it  
was confirmed that this person exists and his name, address and IC  
number tally with that in the JPJ registration.

The house exists and the neighbours confirm that the person concerned  
does live there and that the green Suzuki Vitara has been seen in  
front of the house. This, according to the newspapers, is the car that  
took Altantuya away after she was arrested in front of Razak Baginda’s  
house and taken to Bukit Aman.

Has this man been picked up? And, if not, then why since Altantuya was  
last seen alive driving off with him? Malaysia Today has revealed his  
name, address and IC number. And this man’s neighbours in Ijok confirm  
his existence and that of the car. Note that this was raised in the  
trial and was reported by the mainstream newspapers. So this is not  
mere insinuations and innuendoes.

In an interview in 2002 or 2003, Razak Baginda confirmed that his  
company brokered the submarine deal. He even mentioned the commission  
he had earned. This matter was confirmed by Razak himself and is  
documented in that interview. So this is also no insinuation or  
innuendo. And have we forgotten Razak’s wife’s outburst when she said  
that her husband is innocent and that it is not he who wants to become  
the next Prime Minister? Was Razak’s wife talking about Tengku  
Razaleigh Hamzah, Anwar Ibrahim or Khairy Jamaluddin? And was not  
Razak’s wife once a magistrate who would therefore know the law and  
know what constitutes subjudice?

Dear Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad,

I can go on but let the above suffice for the meantime. The issue of  
the changing of the judge after the filing of the Affidavit during the  
bail hearing (which was raised by Karpal Singh), the defence lawyers  
resigning because of threats from certain people (which Zulkifli  
Nordin confirmed), the changing of the entire prosecuting team the  
morning of the trial (which the prosecutor admitted when he asked for  
a one-month postponement), and much more are all documented and are on  
public record. Let the court of public opinion decide whether Malaysia  
Today is merely raising what is already well-documented or whether  
Malaysia Today is dabbling in insinuations and innuendoes.

Again, I thank you for your letter and really appreciate you taking  
the time to write to us. Let us together, in the spirit of Islam, the  
religion we profess, seek the truth and oppose transgressions — as  
made mandatory by Islam under the concept of amar maaruf, nahi munkar.  
 From God we come and to God we shall return. And we shall be made  
accountable for all that we have done on this earth. And, in the eyes  
of God, those defending kemunkaran will be as guilty as those  
committing it. Let us not fear man for man proposes but God disposes.  
And nothing will befall us that God has not planned will befall us.  
Subjudice and contempt of court are creations of man that will not  
carry any weight in God’s court. So fear God because man even as  
powerful as Prime Ministers and Deputy Prime Ministers will be  
powerless to help you in God’s court where we shall all ultimately be  
judged.

Things are really heating up and we don’t even need an oven.