Around the time that Anwar Ibrahim was fired sixteen of his close associates were arrested without charge under the Internal Security Act.  Subsequently, three of these men, after being held incommunicado for periods of up to 126 days, pled guilty to having been sodomized by Anwar.  All three of these men claim that the police and others in authority forced them, through deprivation, torture and brutality to give false confessions and to enter guilty pleas.  While the authorities deny the accusations of torture and brutality, they do not deny that the men pled guilty without independent legal representation. There has not been any public inquiry into these extraordinary allegations, notwithstanding the fact that the allegations have been accepted as true by international human rights organizations. Nor has there been any public inquiry into the allegation that Anwar Ibrahim is the victim of a political conspiracy to silence him.

Subsequent to his arrest, Anwar was charged with a number of offences all of which relied on the sodomy and adultery allegations. The first charges against Anwar to be brought to trial[7] were based on allegations that he had directed the police to obtain written statements from two people denying the written accusations of sodomy and sexual misconduct they had previously made against him.  The essence of the four Ordinance 22 charges was that Anwar, in so directing the police, had corruptly misused his office to obtain the personal benefit of avoiding either embarrassment or criminal prosecution.  Sodomy and adultery allegations were a material ingredient of these charges.  During the trial, these allegations of sexual improprieties attracted so much criticism, ridicule and incredulity that the prosecution, at the close of their case, amended the charges to remove the sodomy and adultery issues from the trial.  The trial judge, Augustine Paul J., then forbad defense counsel from referring to any of the extensive evidence on these allegations in their defense.  In the early stages of this trial one of the defense lawyers left the defense team after having been summarily sentenced to 3 months in jail for contempt.  By the end of the trial all the remaining defense lawyers had been threatened with contempt citations.

Anwar Ibrahim’s conviction on what remained of the Ordinance 22 charges in April l999 did little to either undermine Ibrahim’s popularity or to support the widely published sodomy allegations.  That trial was widely criticized by human rights organizations and other commentators as has been the Malaysian Court of Appeal’s dismissal of the appeal.

Karpal Singh’s defense of Ibrahim has been vigorous.  In the fall of l999 he gave notice of his intention to call Prime Minister Mahathir as a witness. There is no doubt that Mr. Singh’s capable and ‘full’ representation of Anwar Ibrahim may well undermine public confidence in his client’s guilt irrespective of the verdict.  The political background to the trial of the sodomy charge against Anwar Ibrahim coupled with the unresolved allegations of an underlying political conspiracy give rise to a concern that Karpal Singh may have been charged with sedition to hamper the defense of Anwar Ibrahim.