FEBRUARY 21 — We, concerned members of the Bar, note with utter disbelief and amazement the Press Release of Christopher Leong of 11 February 2015, which implies that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was  ‘persecuted, not prosecuted’ in respect of his charge and conviction by the Federal Court of Malaysia  on 10 February 2015 for sodomy pursuant to Section 377B read with Section 377A, of the Penal  Code.

Firstly, what is glaringly obvious from the said press release, is that, in one breath Christopher Leong  admits having not read the judgment of the Federal Court, and yet in the same breath, the day after the Federal Court decision he makes disparaging remarks that the judgment of the Federal Court was without any basis in law, by reference to media reports of the trial, solely. 

This is a direct attack on the Federal Court without any legal basis with the effect of bringing the Federal Court into disrepute and odium.

The stand and public statement made by Christopher Leong militates against the fundamental and statutory duties of the Malaysian Bar, which includes the protection of the integrity and sanctity of the judicial system. 

Christopher Leong must appreciate the legal position that “trial by media” is not only wrong but must be abhorred in any civilised judicial system, since it is a fundamental requirement that the courts of law can only determine a dispute based on evidence presented in court and not otherwise. 

As cautioned by His Lordship Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof JC (as His Lordship then was) in the case of Dato’ Seri Ir. Hj. Mohammad Nizar Bin Jamaluddin v Dato’ Dr.Zambry Bin Abd. Kadir [2009] 1 LNS 1827:“I believe the course of conduct I took falls quite closely with this recommended practice. It was not an outcome or a reaction against adverse comments on blog sites or certain sections of the mainstream media. It will be a sorry day for the judiciary if a judge’s conduct has to be conditioned by these extraneous factors, since they will fetter the independence of the judiciary unduly.”

Leong has brought the judiciary, a fundamental element in the administration of justice in Malaysia established under Article 121 of the Federal Constitution, into public contempt and ridicule by misrepresenting both facts and the law applicable in Anwar’s sodomy trial and conviction by the Federal Court. 

He does this by questioning why the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, is not charged with abetment under Sections 377A and 377B read together with Section 109 of the Penal Code. 

This is an utterly outrageous statement for even a lay person to make, what more a senior member and leader of the Malaysian legal profession. 

As legal practitioners ourselves, we are outraged, nigh embarrassed, by his remark which clearly contravene not only the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 but also a statutory provision of the Legal Profession Act 1976, namely Section 42 which stipulates that the Malaysian Bar must “promote good relations ... in the administration of law and justice in Malaysia.”

Such a statement is wholly unbecoming and based on flawed reading of the provisions in the sections concerned. 

A plain reading of Sections 377A and 377B of the Penal Code must certainly lead a reader thereof to conclude that the statutory provisions do not criminalise homosexuality per se but sodomy, namely the act of insertion by a man of his penis into the anus of another person, be that a man, woman or child. Such an act is considered vile by the values held by the vast majority of Malaysians and rightly attracts sanction. 

This is common knowledge and must certainly be within the awareness of Leong, being the President of the Malaysian Bar. 

Also, contrary to what he claims, the aforementioned provisions are in no way rarely used, but are used on a recurring basis, one such example being the previous conviction for sodomy of one Abd Rahim Abd Rahaman by the Court of Appeal in 2010 for multiple counts of sodomy. 

The full statistics of cases of this nature is easily accessible by requesting the same from the other arm of the legal system being the Attorney General’s Office. 

Did Leong avail himself to these statistics, before making a brash and unsupported allegation? 

Leong’s sanction and participation in the continued smear of the Malaysian judiciary in this matter, by irresponsible citizens as well as elements of the international community must be corrected immediately and to this end, we, concerned members of the Bar, CALL UPON MR CHRISTOPHER LEONG, PRESIDENT OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR TO IMMEDIATELY retract the Press Release dated 11 February 2015 AND to tender an unequivocal and unconditional public apology to the judiciary AND similarly to communicate the same to  all international bodies and entities, FAILING WHICH we shall be constrained to take all necessary steps to call for his immediate resignation from the position as President of the Malaysian Bar and call upon the Attorney General to take the necessary contempt proceeding against  Mr. Christopher Leong. 

We also wish to place on record that in no way does the Press Release of Mr. Christopher Leong dated 11 February 2015 represent the views of the majority members of the Malaysian Bar.

Press Statement by concerned and currently practising members of the Malaysian Bar:-

ZAINUR ZAKARIA

LOW JOO HEAN

FAIDHUR RAHMAN ABDUL HADI

SITI FARHA BTE GARIEB

EUGENE LEE HONG WHYE

HARYANTI BINTI OTHMAN

DATO’ ABU BAKAR AS-SIDEK

MOHD IZZAT AFIFI BIN HJ ABDUL 

ADHILAH ALI

DATO MOHD NOR AMIN

TEH HOOI WOON

MUHAMMAD LUTTFI ABDUL KHALID

ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN MUSTAFFA

TAN SRI ABDUL AZIZ ABDUL RAHMAN

LUKMAN SHERIFF ALIAS

FATIHAH JAMHARI

AZRIL MOHD AMIN

DATO’ SYED FAISAL SYED ABDULLAH

DATO’ SERI HAJI AMLI

DATO’ SYED AZIMAL

TUNKU ALIZAN BIN RAJA MUHAMMAD 

AHMAD EDHAM ABDULWANI

ZURI ZABUDDIN BIN BUDIMAN

DATO’ AMRAN WAHID 

NURRUL NADIA BINTI NORRIZAN

HANIF ABDUL RAHMAN

MEGAT ABDUL MUNIR

ZAIRUS EFFENDI BIN SUHAIMI

AIDIL KHALID

ROSMAN AZWAN BIN OSMAN

WAN ANUAR WAN MOHD NOR

KEE MOHD THARIQ BIN K ZAINAL 

MOHD NORFAZLI BIN MOHD 

NUR SAKINAH SALLEH @ ALI

FAKHRUL AZMAN

ZEFFREE BIN ZAINUDDIN

AZMI RAIS

DATO’ MOHAMAD BIN SHAHUL 

SITI NUR MOKHTAR

MAHARYATI ABD RASHID

MOHAMAD SIDDIQ BIN MOHD AZANI

MOHD SABRI BIN ZAKARIA

MOHD FASHA BIN MUSTHAFA

MOHD SAIFULDIN AB RAHMAN

AMIRUDDIN MOHAMMED

ZAHARMAN ZAINAL ABIDIN

SERENE TAN

SYED ZAHRAN BIN SYED SHAHABUDDIN

ADZLY ABDUL MANAS

SITI NORFARAHAINI ABD RAFOR

NORNADIA BINTI ABD AZIZ

MOHD ZHAFRI BIN AMINURASHID

NUR AZHANI BT ZAINAL BADRI

JULITA ILHANI ABDUL JABBAR

NAZIRA BINTI ABDUL RAHIM

OMAYAH OMAR

MAZITA BT OSMAN

MUHAMMAD HAKIMIE BIN ALI

NORMALA MOHD MOKHTAR

YUSRI BIN KAMARUDDIN

AZAINE BIN MOHAMED

ROSFINAH RAHMAT

NORASHIKIN BINTI ABDUL RAHMAN

KHAIRIZAN BIN AZIZI

AMRAN PARIMON

ADRI BIN ABDULLAH

MOHD FARED BIN MOHD KHALID

MOHD KHAIRUL AZWAN BIN MOHD 

MOHD AL HAFIDZ BIN MOHD 

AHMAD SOLEH BIN YUSOF

ADRI AMRUL BIN ARIFIN

MOHAMMED HAFIDZ GHOZALI

MOHD FARID ISMAIL

MAZLINA ATAN

MIMIRAHAYU AHMAD

SAIFUL BAHARI BIN OMAR

RASHIDATUL AKMAR ABDUL RASHID

ATUFFAH BIN SAID

AHMAD ZAHID ABU HASHIM

KHAIRIN NISA BT ISMAIL

MOHD HISHAM BIN MD NEN

MOHD KHAIRUL AZWAN BIN MOHD 

SITI NUR MOKHTAR

HARFIZAH ABDUL GHAFFAR

NAWAL BT HARUN

ZAMZURI MOHD YATIM

MOHD KHAIRUL AZAM ABDUL AZIZ

AIDA RAHAYU

DATO’ AZIZ MD YUSUFF

MAISYIAH HJ HASAN

FATIMAH ZAHARAH

TUN AHMAD FADZIL TUN ABDUL RAZAK

YUSLINOV AHMAD

ROHANI KAMBOL

HALIZA BINTI ABDULLAH

SHARIFAH SHEWIKAR ALHABSHI

EDELEEN DELL AKBAR

YUSMAN BIN MOHD BADAR

MOHD AMIRUDIN BIN MOHAMAD

NORJEHAN ABU BAKAR

*This is the personal opinion of the writers or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.