Razak Baginda saved by his affidavit
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 2 - The acquittal of political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda in the high-profile murder case of his former Mongolian lover made big headlines in Malaysian newspapers yesterday, with many zooming in on how his affidavit had saved him.
The sleazy and sensational affair, and Abdul Razak's close ties to Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak, had kept the case in the public eye as the trial ran for two years.
His almost-forgotten affidavit filed two years ago was the highlight as it was pivotal to the High Court judge's decision to acquit him of abetting the murder.
The document was filed in court in an attempt by Abdul Razak, 48, to obtain bail before the trial started. He failed to get bail and there was criticism then by legal experts who considered it a wrong move to disclose
his case so early in the trial.
But it turned out to be an astute move. High Court judge Mohamed Zaki Mohamed Yasin on Friday ruled that the tell-all affidavit had helped clear him of the charge of asking two policemen to kill Altantuya
Shaariibuu.
"In the absence of the rebuttal evidence against them (statements in the affidavit), coupled with the fact that there is no legal onus for him to rebut any statutory presumption, there is clearly no reason for the
statements to be ignored and rejected," the judge said.
The lengthy document detailed how Abdul Razak met Altantuya in 2004, and had an affair with her that lasted until 2005.
After they broke up, he alleged that the 28-year-old interpreter harassed him, and that he had sought the help of the police. But he denied telling them to kill her.
According to court evidence, Altantuya's remains were found in a jungle outside Kuala Lumpur, blown up with explosives after she was shot dead.
The judge found that 13 statements in the affidavit were not rebutted by evidence put forward by prosecutors. In a nutshell, they recounted how Abdul Razak had asked Musa Safri, a security aide of the deputy premier, for help because of Altantuya's harassment.
Musa reportedly said he would introduce him to a police officer. The co-accused Azilah Hadri, an officer from an elite unit that guards VVIPs, called Abdul Razak the next day.
Abdul Razak said he called Azilah on Oct 19, 2006, when Altantuya turned up at his house.
Altantuya was taken away by three police officers. Abdul Razak said he subsequently asked Musa what had happened to Altantuya but the aide said Azilah did not tell him.
The judge on Friday found these statements were corroborated by witnesses at the trial, and "clearly negated and nullified the act of abetment as alleged".
This detailed legal explanation was, however, described by veteran opposition politician Lim Kit Siang as a technical one, as he demanded further investigation.
The immediate public reaction on the Internet was, as expected, similar. Abdul Razak's close ties to DPM Najib were hauled out to hint at favoured treatment although there was no evidence of this.
Lim wrote in his blog that it was imperative for Najib to face an independent government inquiry on the allegations.
So far, Abdul Razak has not given his side of the story. After his acquittal, he went back to his house in upmarket Damansara Heights before going to the mosque for Friday prayers.
He wore broad smiles each time he came out of the house, but declined to speak to reporters. He also said he had been fasting for the 22 months since he was arrested.
His two co-accused, Azilah and Sirul Azhar Umar, who allegedly killed Altantuya, have been ordered to present their defence. The hearing will begin on Nov 10.
Here are excerpts of the affidavit filed by Abdul Razak Baginda:
EVEN though I had appointed (private eye) P. Balasubramaniam, the harassment by Altantuya against my family and me did not stop. Hence, I asked Deputy Superintendent Musa Safri (a security aide to Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak) for help.
I also sought help to be introduced to a police officer from the Brickfields police station as my house was under their jurisdiction.
DSP Musa told me that he would introduce me to an officer who would help me.
On Oct 17, 2006, the deceased came to my house and wanted to meet me. I was not at home at that time, and my wife learnt of her visit.
On the night of Oct 17, I was at home and there was a commotion outside the house.
I called Balasubramaniam and Dhiren Norendra (a lawyer) to help me. A police patrol car arrived to settle the matter.
DSP Musa later called me and said a police officer would call me to help me sort out my problem with the deceased.
On the morning of Oct 18, 2006, Azilah Hadri (one of the co-accused) called me and introduced himself as the police officer who was referred by DSP Musa to help me.
I subsequently met with Azilah. I told him that the deceased had caused a commotion at my house, and asked him to conduct patrols around my house.
On Oct 19, 2006, Balasubramaniam called me and told me that there was a commotion outside my house. I was out with my family. So I called Azilah for help.
Balasubramaniam told me that three plainclothes police officers came to my house... to take the deceased away.
On Oct 20, I bumped into DSP Musa. I asked him what happened the night before and DSP Musa told me Azilah did not tell him anything. - - The Straits Times
I agree that in Malaysia, power is everything to make one rich and even to enjoy his entire sinful life without being worried of law implication and penalty of any kind! Power can extend to succumb even the court and the judge to rule out a judgment to fit their requirement!
ReplyDeleteThe so-called judiciary system is only a shackle chain to wind up those revolting dissidents even without any concrete evidence of guilt, they can be simply sentenced to be locked up for years without any trial! It will take decades for this Country to become real democratic and civilized enough to gain international global respects! It's a pity for the rakyat!