Prosecution: Mohd Saiful did not fabricate evidence in sodomy case

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court was told today that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was a dominant and influential person and his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan was afraid of his superior.
Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, the senior lawyer of Saiful the complainant in Anwar's sodomy appeal case, said Saiful was under pressure and was an "unwilling" participant.
"You must remember, people who are subjected to sexual harassment or abuse become subservient," said Shafee in his submission to the five-member panel chaired by Tun Arifin Zakaria.
He added that Anwar is no ordinary appellant.
"This is someone dominant, charismatic and influential," he said.
Meanwhile Bernama reported that Shafee said Saiful could not have fabricated evidence as there is overwhelming truth in his entire testimony over his alleged sodomy.
Shafee said Saiful, the complainant in the case, could have fabricated evidence, but he did not.
"There are lot of rings of truth. This young man could not have made up the story. He could have denied certain things, but he did not, so he is a truthful witness," he said.
Shafee said Saiful had answered spontaneous questions posed to him in court and had extensively explained one by one what happened before and after the alleged sodomy.
Shafee was submitting for the prosecution in the appeal by Anwar against his conviction and five-year jail for having allegedly sodomised his former aide Saiful at Desa Damansara condominium unit in Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur on June 26, 2008.
He said the sexual harassment took place within four months before Saiful resigned as Anwar's personal aide.
Shafee pointed out there were indications that the sodomy incident on June 26, 2008 was not the first time based on Saiful's evidence where he had demonstrated how it happened.
"The witness (Saiful) had said the act was rough. He said he felt pain in his rectum and suffered stomach cramps and 'Anwar squirted his semen into my anus as usual'," he argued.
Shafee said the words 'as usual' indicated that the alleged incident had occurred more than once. He said Saiful had said that after they had discussed the work schedule, Anwar had approached him and said, "Can I f... you today?"
Shafee said the words would only be mentioned if you knew a person well. Saying that Saiful was a truthful witness, Muhammad Shafee said the complainant had demonstrated the sodomy act at the condominium before the trial judge.
He said that initially Saiful was reluctant to accept Anwar's offer for sodomy, but when Anwar became angry, both of them went to the master bedroom where the alleged incident occurred.
Shafee also argued that if there was no relationship between them, why would Anwar give a Brioni (Italian high-end fashion) suit to Mohd Saiful.
"Saiful wore a Brioni suit, which even I don't have," he added.
Shafee said Saiful earned RM1,000 a month. He submitted that Anwar had brought Mohd Saiful on overseas trips to Singapore and Hong Kong and in Singapore the complainant was given US$1,000 as allowance.
On Anwar's statement from the dock, he said the appellant had alleged that the sodomy charge was a political conspiracy by linking the highest person in the country, the prime minister, right down to the investigating officer.
Shafee said Anwar also attacked the trial judge which, he claimed, amounted to contempt of court.
"Anyone who decided in finality against him is part of the conspiracy and dishonest, but when he was acquitted, it was not part of the conspiracy," he argued.
He also pointed out the failure on Anwar's part to call his alibi witnesses, which was crucial to the appellant's case.
After the court adjourned the hearing to Monday, Shafee told reporters he had covered 20% of his submission today.