By B Nantha Kumar
KUALA LUMPUR: PKR vice-president R Sivarasa has accused Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan of committing perjury during Anwar Ibrahim's first sodomy trial in 1998.
In a report filed with the Damansara Utama police station today, the Subang MP claimed that Musa, then a senior police officer who spearheaded the investigations, had told the court that he possessed a degree in law.
“In fact at the time of the trial, he possessed a diploma,” he told reporters.
"The false statement by Musa was material because it influenced his personal credibility in this judicature hearing," he added.
Sivarasa said Musa had committed an offence under Section 191 Penal Code and could be punished under Section 193.
He urged the police to conduct an investigation “without fear or favour because giving false evidence under oath was an offence”.
Contradictory statements
On Dec 14, 1998, Musa was asked by the late counsel Christopher Fernando if he had a law degree, to which Musa said he had.
He said the degree was obtained in 1983 from the University of Wales.
In a later case involving former federal commercial crimes department head Ramli Yusuf, Sivarasa said Musa testified that he had a diploma in law.
“This contradicts his statement during Anwar’s trial when he said he had a degree in law,” he added.
Sivarasa also noted that in Ramli's case, the presiding judge Supang Lian had ruled that Musa’s testimony was “unrealiable” and should be “disregarded”.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
YB
ReplyDeleteThe Malaysian Insider reported that "PKR Indian leaders want Indian candidate for Hulu Selangor ".
Is that true?
I thought PKR leaders talk multi-racial and also have discipline to discuss things with party leadership and then only announce decisions to the public.
This article actually means that PKR is no different from BN.
Could you clarify what you actally said to Malaysian Insider.
PARAMESWARA
Yes but which of the two statements has been found to be the truth or a falsehood? On what basis other than the statement of a third party does the statement of the IGP become a truth or a falsehood?
ReplyDeleteJust because someone else has subsequent to the IGP's statement on the subject claimed that th IGP possess a diploma and not a degree does not necessarily make that subsequent statement by that third party any more the truth of his assertions now doess it?
Perhaps a demand that the IGP prove the veracity of his statement (if necessary)about his academic qualifications and provide verificaiton from the University of Wales could provide a more reliable answer to the question seeing it so vexes and scandalises you.
In any event if the word degree was used in place of the word diploma, how really relevant is it to his possession of a qualification in law or to the assertion that Anwar sodomised his victim?
The terms diploma and degree are often used to denote a higher qualification by many. It is common practice in Europe for instance. Not uncommon is also the use of the word Uztaz (professor) by Arabs when addressing someone who has obtained a degree although that person may not be a professor. It is a term that denotes respect for the intellect of the subject being addressed. That does not make the addressee a liar for accepting or acknowledging the honour.
Nothing spectacular or truly relevant about your 'discovery'. Sensational perhaps. Could we not expect better from a government in 'waiting?'