Televise Anwar Court Proceedings

Aliran regrets that the requests of many observers who wanted to witness the trial of Anwar Ibrahim were not accommodated. The reason for the refusal is totally unacceptable to thinking Malaysians.

Justice Augustine Paul had said that the presence of foreign organisations was not only insulting but implied that they have supervisory power over Malaysia’s judiciary and this amounts to interference in the independence of the judiciary.

But in previous important cases, the courts had allowed representatives from both foreign and local groups to be present during court proceedings. No one accused them then of ‘supervising’ or interfering with the judiciary. Our judicial system did not suffer any adverse consequences by their presence.

‘‘Why should we allow outsiders to come here and supervise us?’’ asked Justice Paul. If that is the case, why then did we invite Commonwealth observers to monitor the 1990 general election?

In any case, it is difficult to understand how foreign observers could interfere in the independence of the judiciary by their presence. How is it possible for them to influence the court verdict or intimidate the presiding judge?

If limited space is another reason for barring observers and the public from witnessing what should be an open trial, then Aliran suggests that the proceedings be televised ‘live’. A live telecast would have the added advantage of discouraging anxious Malaysians from gathering outside the court in their vain attempt to follow the proceedings of Malaysia’s most important legal case.

P Ramakrishnan
President
3 November 1998