Rahim’s case has reinforced widespread concerns that there is something fundamentally wrong with the system of justice in Malaysia, as there appears to be selective justice, selective prosecution and selective framing of charges.
The people will be drawing comparison between Anwar and Rahim Noor.
The first comparison will be the sentence, between Anwar’s six years and Rahim Noor’s two months.
Compared to Anwar’s case, both of which happened almost instantaneously in time, there had been an inordinate delay in bringing Rahim Noor’s case to justice - with the former police head taking 18 months for his case to come to trial when Anwar was tried quite instantaneously. It would appear that the wheels of justice are cranked into action instantly for certain personalities while for others, they creaked with agonising slowness.
Rahim was allowed bail pending appeal, but Anwar was not only not allowed bail pending appeal, he was even denied bail during trial.
I call on the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah to explain why he had acceded to the request of Rahim’s defence and agreed to a reduced charge of voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323 of the Penal Code when from the facts as admitted by the former IGP yesterday, what Rahim Noor did was an attempt at causing grievous hurt to Anwar - coming under section 325 of the Penal Code read with section 511, which carries a three-and-a-half years’ jail term and a fine.
The evidence adduced at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Anwar’s "black eye" was very clear that if Rahim Noor had not been restrained by other police officers, Anwar would have suffered even more grievous injury which could prove fatal.