Closing in for the kill

Today, the Prosecution wants the court to decide whether it can force Anwar Ibrahim to give his DNA sample. Will the action succeed and will Anwar have to comply to the court ruling? What is the Prosecution’s argument in its attempt to convince the court that it should compel Anwar to provide his DNA sample? Well, read part of the 14-page document that was reported by the New Straits Times. This will throw some light on the matter that may decide whether Anwar will spend the rest of his life in jail. 


Raja Petra Kamarudin

Prosecution completes case, seeks Anwar’s DNA sample 

(Bernama) – The High Court ordered the prosecution and defence in the Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial to make submissions on Monday, March 14 on two prosecution applications, one of which is to order Anwar to provide a DNA sample.

Justice Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah gave the order on Friday, March 11 after the head of the prosecution, Solicitor-General Datuk Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden, made the applications at the end of the prosecution’s case.

One of the applications was for the court to use its powers under the Evidence Act 1950 to compel Anwar to provide a DNA sample for analysis. The other was to review the decision of the court not to allow three items to be tendered as exhibits following a trial-within-a-trial.

Anwar’s lawyer Karpal Singh objected to the prosecution’s applications.

Anwar, 63, Parti Keadilan Rakyat advisor and Permatang Pauh MP, has claimed trial to performing carnal intercourse against the order of nature on his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at a condominium unit in Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur, on June 26, 2008.

Mohamed Yusof said the application for the DNA sample was in accordance with sections 73 and 165 of the Evidence Act, and arose following the testimony of witnesses, particularly chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong, who confirmed the presence of several DNA profiles in the anus of Mohd Saiful.

“The application is made to seek the truth and justice for all quarters,” he said.

He also applied for the court to review the decision of Justice Mohamad Zabidin at the end of a trial-within-a-trial pertaining to the admissibility of three items as exhibits.

The judge had ruled that a toothbrush, towel and mineral water bottle taken from the lockup where Anwar was kept overnight were obtained by unfair means and therefore should be excluded from the trial.

Mohamed Yusof argued that the warrant for the arrest of Anwar had been admitted as an exhibit after the trial-within-a-trial.