The way Suresh Gnasegarah makes the comparison between Mandela or Gandhi and Anwar Ibrahim makes one wonder where he was when the Royal Commision into the Anwar's beating was in progress.

Granted, nobody - not even Wan Azizah - has said that Malaysian doctors are assassins. However, an act of sabotage during the operation can still happen without the doctor's knowledge.

Where were Malaysian doctors when Anwar was left for the dead in the cell in 1998 after the beating? Was it not a Malaysian doctor who refused to recommend the proper treatment for the black-eyed man?

Does Suresh honestly think that credibility is the first priority of today's government? Is he not aware of the hoo-ha following the recent general election? Nobody gave a damn to credibility then.

The key issue here is whether there is a legal or constitutional provision prohibiting people in Anwar's position from seek treatment overseas. Why worry about creating a legally-binding precedent when what we see now is already following the precedents set after September 1998?

Suresh should be more concerned of the fact that a precedent has been in that we have a tainted judiciary system in the country. On costs, it goes without saying that Anwar or his family would foot the bill since it is his choice.

And it is rather ironic for Suresh to compare Anwar with the likes of Mandela and Gandhi who are considered once- in-a-lifetime persons and political prisoners in one instance, with the likes of Mona Fandey and Botak Chin who are real criminals in another instance.

Yes, we all should play by the rules, not only Anwar. What about the other side? Indeed, in the face of all this, what is Islam Hadhari all about when none of the actions can be construed as Islamic in nature?