Resolution adopted without a vote by the Inter-Parliamentary Council
at its 169th session (Ouagadougou, 14 September 2001)

The Inter-Parliamentary Council,

Referring to the resolution it adopted at its 168th session (April 2001) on the case of Mr. Anwar Ibrahim, a member of the House of Representatives of Malaysia, and to the related report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians,

Recalling the following information on file:

• After his arrest in September 1998, Mr. Anwar Ibrahim was assaulted by the then Inspector General of Police, Rahim Noor. Following the findings of a specially instituted Royal Commission, Rahim Noor was charged with causing grievous bodily harm. He pleaded guilty only after the charge was amended to the lesser offence of "causing hurt". In March 2000, Rahim Noor was found guilty of that charge, fined US$ 530, sentenced to two months' imprisonment and granted bail pending appeal;

• Mr. Anwar Ibrahim was found guilty on 14 April 1999 of corrupt practices and sentenced to six years' imprisonment. On 29 April 2000, the Court of Appeal upheld the verdict, ruling that there was "no doubt whatsoever" that Anwar Ibrahim had abused his official powers by ordering the police in 1997 to intimidate two people into withdrawing sexual allegations against him. Mr. Anwar Ibrahim has now appealed to the last instance, the Federal Court;

• On 8 August 2000, the Kuala Lumpur High Court found Mr. Anwar Ibrahim and his adoptive brother, Mr. Sukma Darmawan, guilty of sodomy and sentenced them to nine and six years' imprisonment, respectively; an appeal is pending,

Recalling that during its session in Havana, the Malaysian delegation submitted comprehensive written comments on the resolution which the Council had adopted in Jakarta (October 2000) on the case of Mr. Anwar Ibrahim; considering that in Ouagadougou the Malaysian delegation referred to the Committee a new document consisting of an information paper on the medical facilities and treatment provided for Mr. Anwar Ibrahim, a report from the Director General of Prisons, comments on the application by Anwar Ibrahim for release under Section 43 of the Prison Act for the purpose of going overseas for medical treatment, an information paper on Anwar Ibrahim's dismissal, trial and detention, and additional comments on the Council resolution adopted in Jakarta,

Considering that the Committee has been unable, at such short notice, to study this document thoroughly at its present session and submit its conclusions thereon; noting nevertheless the following in relation to its consistent concerns at (a) Anwar Ibrahim's state of health, in particular the Government's refusal to allow him to go abroad for urgent spinal surgery, (b) the statements made by persons questioned or accused in connection with Anwar Ibrahim's case that testimony had been extracted from them under duress, and (c) the instances of harassment of defence lawyers and interference with their duty to defend their clients to the best of their ability; recalling in this respect in particular that one of Anwar Ibrahim's defence counsels, Zainur Zakaria, was found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to three months' imprisonment for having submitted to court an affidavit declaring that the prosecutors in this case had attempted to obtain a false statement against Anwar Ibrahim;

Considering that:

• whereas in the comments submitted in Ouagadougou, the Malaysian delegation argues that, under the Prison Act, Anwar Ibrahim is not eligible to invoke a right to medical treatment abroad, the Malaysian National Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) issued a press statement on 31 May 2001 in which it recognised that a patient had a right to his or her informed choice of medical treatment and, observing that there were no prohibitions in law for Anwar Ibrahim to be sent abroad for medical treatment, stated that "from the medical, legal and human rights perspectives, Anwar Ibrahim should be allowed to exercise his right to choice of medical treatment"; Anwar Ibrahim, who had undergone medical treatment at Kuala Lumpur Hospital since 25 November 2000, was moved back to prison on 10 May 2001 after he refused to undergo spinal surgery locally;

• whereas in the comments it submitted in Havana, the Malaysian delegation affirmed that the charge against Mr. Zainur Zakaria for contempt of court had been based on facts and the law in Malaysia, the Federal Court, in its ruling of 27 July 2001 on Mr. Zakaria's appeal, reached a different conclusion, quashed the conviction and set aside the three-month sentence,

1. Thanks the authorities for submitting further information and comments, and requests the Committee to present its observations thereon at its next session;

2. Calls on the authorities to heed the recommendation of the Malaysian National Human Rights Commission and so allow Anwar Ibrahim to pursue his personal choice of medical treatment abroad;

3. Calls in particular on the Malaysian Parliament, as a guardian of human rights, to give full support to the clear recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission;

4. Considers that the Federal Court ruling has strong implications for the Anwar Ibrahim case as it lends further credence to the defence argument that the prosecution fabricated evidence against Anwar Ibrahim and, consequently, that his prosecution was politically motivated;

5. Requests the Secretary General to convey this resolution to the Malaysian authorities, pressing the plea that Anwar Ibrahim be allowed to be treated by the physician and method of his choice;

6. Requests the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians to continue examining this case and report to its at its next session (March 2002).

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 106th Conference and related meetings of the Inter-Parliamentary Union" in PDF format (file size approximately 454K). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.