Is It A Frame-Up?

When prime minister Mahathir Mohammad sacked his deputy Anwar Ibrahim in September last year, he defended the decision by saying that his morals made him unfit to be the leader of an Islamic country. Last week, the prosecution charged Anwar with four counts of corruption and one of sodomy, amid widespread belief that there's been a frame-up. The trial has redefined the basis of leadership in Malaysia, with Islam intruding into politics indelibly. Now, every leader's personal life will be under scrutiny.

And quite unlike Bill Clinton who's in the dock for an inappropriate relationship but could get away, Anwar could spend 20 years in prison if convicted. This, despite the fact that the prosecution's case is disjointed. Two men, Sukma Darmawan and Munawar Ahmad Anees, who were convicted for being sodomised by Anwar, have both appealed their sentence. Even the police chief investigating Anwar's case Abdul Rahim Noor resigned last week. But just like the US president, perceived victimisation has only boosted Anwar's popularity, amid widespread distaste at the way charges of sexual misdemeanour have been fleshed out for public consumption in what is still a conservative society. Critics say Malaysia will never be the same again.

And though Azizan Abu Bakar, a one-time driver of Anwar's wife and an alleged sodomy victim, was produced in court as a prosecution witness, and Ummi Hafilda Ali, sister of his former private secretary, accused Anwar of sleeping with Shamsidar Taharin, the secretary's wife, the shifting mass of evidence suggests that Anwar is a victim of a political vendetta.

The prosecution did produce dna evidence to prove that semen and vaginal stains found on a mattress in an apartment owned by a businessman were those of Anwar and that of his former special assistant's wife. But the dna strains were taken in stealth in detention, from a blood sample, despite Anwar's objections; and stains were found on a mattress kept in a store room at the police HQ for months. This throws doubts on the prosecution case and strengthens public perception that heavy-handed behaviour is the norm.

The police has not countered Anwar's allegations that he has been assaulted in detention; nor the charge that the attorney-general's office agreed to reduce the death penalty a businessman friend of Anwar faces in return for fabricated evidence of the ex-deputy PM's guilt. To top it all, Mahathir's inept handling of the whole affair has damaged the prime minister irrevocably. Anwar, detained under the draconian Internal Security Act and beaten up so that he sported a black eye when he first appeared in court, continues to spew defiance, accusing his former mentor of being a dictator, demanding that he be investigated for corruption.

To defuse the situation, Mahathir appealed thrice to Anwar first on September 21 after his detention; then after he was beaten up; the third the week before Christmas to leave the country for five years of exile. But Anwar has spurned all offers, and has strengthened his position because the Islamic community, at which the charges against him were aimed at, is still with Anwar. Before he crossed swords with Mahathir, Anwar had ably strengthened Islamic institutions to counter the growing assertiveness of the Party Islam Malaysia.

The wide perception that Mahathir moved against his former deputy for fear of what he would do against the growing nepotism, cronyism and financial mismanagement now becomes more believable. The courts too refused, wrongly, to apply one hitherto unknown constitutional amendment until a retired Supreme Court judge mentioned it in a newspaper article that deprives the civil courts of jurisdiction in matters Muslim personal law. Anwar insists he be tried on the sodomy charges under Shariah law.

The court refuses to take cognisance of the defence claim of a political conspiracy. But Mahathir now finds he cannot go to the polls, as he had intended to, without losing ground. His advisors are even urging him to bring back Anwar at least until general and party elections are over; that he should give him the benefit of doubt. Because the people, by and large, do not feel he has been given a fair hearing.

The confrontation is stark and vicious because Mahathir, in force-feeding the Malay into business and commerce on taking office, built up an edifice on nepotism and corruption. So much so that both the urban and rural Malay feel they have been shortchanged. Prosecution witnesses highlight a consistent devaluation of Malaysia's institutions: the judiciary, the civil service, the police. The institutions were devalued consistently under Mahathir, notes a former high court judge, but the Anwar trial brought it irrevocably into the public domain.