So kudos, you’ve made your point, about the *word* sodomite.

Well, I’m referring to Malaysian civil/criminal law, i.e. the system of law in general. Seeing that its in the Penal Code, and this should be fairly similar to what is practised in the UK (and to an extent Australia). Malaysia as a country hasn’t made much ground breaking law, having favoured Commonwealth law in general (quite unlike Australian law, in where Commonwealth law does apply, but there are some ground breaking new acts, etc.)

“Insufficient evidence” in Malaysia, really means a lot of things Russell. The judiciary is corrupt (please read up on the recent Fairuz/Lingam case/video), the police and public prosecution find that botching up things is really easy, and so on. Getting away on an “insufficient evidence” technicality is *really easy* in Malaysia. Like I said in a previous comment, even murderers go scot free.

All that aside, this is not the venue for discussing odd/corrupt practices. Did the legal system work for Anwar with one charge, and not another?

Thanks for the offer Russell. I didn’t know you were affiliated with advocacy organisations. Do tell me more :)

I respect your opinions on Hindraf and as a fellow Malaysians I can understand why. But have you really looked into the contents of Hindraf’s memorandum to Gordon Brown? Do you sincerely agree with them? It is very easy to get emotional and hype up on racial issues, but don’t you think there are other players and motivation behind Hindraf?

Your blog is well-read all over the world. It would be a shame if it portrays the wrong pictures of Malaysian politics. Have a look up on what did Tun VT Sambanthan said in 1 June 1965 about the social contract of Malaysia. And also what did Dr. Kumar from Parti Sosialis Malaysia thinks about Hindraf.

http://www.parti-sosialis.org/?p=31

And tell me that you do not agree with any of them.

Please note that I never accused you of being anything like the GodHatesAmerica,com crowd. I merely stated that I believe your blog post would appeal more to them than to the majority of your readers (who are generally fairly liberal and open-minded people in the Linux community).

Please try and find an example of someone using the term “sodomite” in a friendly manner, you will find it quite difficult. Then try and find an example of the word being used as a term of abuse - you will find it very easy.

Regarding the Malaysian “civil” law, what exactly does this mean? In the legal systems of Australia, the US, and the UK “civil law” means individuals suing for damages after being wronged by another person in what is generally a non-criminal manner (it may be a crime but that is not required). In such cases the law is based on what is most likely, this is why for example OJ Simpson was found not guilty in a criminal case (where there is a presumption of innocence and the prosecution must prove a case beyond reasonable doubt) but lost in a civil case (it’s most likely he did it).

It seems that the judges decided that in the conditions of an Australian “civil” suit Anwar would be found guilty but under the conditions of Australian (and apparently Malaysian) criminal law there was insufficient evidence.

PS If you ever want me to review a political post before publication then feel free to email it to me. I’ve written many political blog posts and also help out an advocacy organisation in preparing such material so I have some practice with this. I could also suggest some issues you could mention if you want to trigger interest among Australian readers.

Contradictions in the prosecutions case (as a reason to overturn the decision) sound very different to “reversing” the decision. I only wish there was a Freedom of Information Act, and we could access the Federal Court decisions easily, now…

“Funny” site, that GodHatesAmerica,com. I only got to read the cached version, and I don’t think I sound anything like that, just by using the word ’sodomite’. And I doubt those that read the site regularly will have much to say about my post…

Thanks for your thoughts, re: strategy. Have a good day!

You might find http://www.sodomylaws.org/world/malaysia/malaysia.htm interesting reading.

And, its not a term of abuse - check out the dictionary sometime, its generally defined as “a person who engages in sodomy.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_Ibrahim

The above web page says “he was sentenced in a highly controversial trial to six years in prison for corruption and in 2000 to another nine years in prison for sodomy. However, in 2004, an appeals court reversed the second conviction and he was released”. That is significantly different from saying that the charges were dropped.

I agree with you about Article 153, and almost everything in your post, your previous posts about Malaysian politics are also sensible.

But I stand by my point that if you accuse someone of being a sodomite then you will not get much support from the majority of readers in Australia and the US. Those who do support such things will be of the GodHatesAmerica,com type.

Also as an issue of strategy, when writing political posts you want to stick tightly to the point to avoid being side-tracked by such issues. A political post WILL get disagreement from some readers and you want to make sure that those who disagree do so because they oppose your main point.