I'm amused by Suresh Gnasegarah's letter Why Anwar must play by the rules because he does not seem to be able to convince even himself in the end.

Having laid down the 'underlying principle' that a prison is to take away fundamental human rights (which itself is an inhumane blanket assertion that would justify the denial of clean drinking water and medicine), he felt this inadequate enough to pile on the finer and higher goals of avoiding a 'prison-class system, not disrupting prison social dynamics and reducing prison bureaucracy and prison costs'.

And also - if there is no cost to be borne by the prison - the hypothetical abuse of overseas hospital stays by rich criminals. I hope Germany is not offended by being compared with corrupted India and Cambodia (with apologies to the latter two countries as well).

Oddly, such brilliant reasons were not cited by the health minister in denying Anwar's treatment in Germany. Sounding like a correctional officer justifying prison priorities is shielding the one who is really responsible.

The final authority and responsibility for Anwar's treatment lies with the internal security minister, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who has managed to remain silent thanks to such distractions.

The writer also ignores the opinion of a specialist doctor (unlike other authoritative-sounding doctors of unknown specialisation) that the specific and advanced surgery has simply little hope of success if done locally.

If only the writer would accede to the real worry about something 'bad' or a hint of assassination as readily as he admitted that 'I find the reasons for Anwar's current incarceration dubious', or that 'Nobody in their right mind will be able to deny that Anwar is a political prisoner', then he could become more congruent in his judgement and the whole argument be easily settled in favour of Anwar getting treatment in some safer place like Germany.

Despite persistent reminders by other writers, he simply forgets about Anwar's black eye and near-death experience inside Bukit Aman (where security would presumably be higher than in any hospital) at the hands of a top police officer, who was eventually convicted in the court for the assault.

I think many would want to voice out, more strongly than Anwar's wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, our fear of an assassination attempt or some 'arranged negligence' if Anwar's surgery was done locally.

Of course, we don't believe doctors would do it. And we have to be careful not to suggest that the government would do that. But we could be charitable and suggest that there are substantial risks from some rogue elements as had happened before in Bukit Aman.

Repeatedly harping on justice in a blatant manipulation to shame the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) is a bit lame and hypocritical when the writer himself admits that Anwar is a political prisoner and his 'incarceration dubious'.

Finally, the names he dropped would be shamed by the deeds. Somebody else can go and ask Gandhi. I can't because he is dead. But I suspect if we were to ask Mandela, he would tell you: 'Why ask the question? Anwar should have been free from day one.'