The counsel for former Inspector-General of Police Rahim Noor today told the High Court that Rahim did not admit sooner to assaulting Anwar Ibrahim because of the country's tense situation at that time.

Lawyer K Kumaraendran stated that if Rahim had pleaded guilty sooner there would have been more demonstrations in Kuala Lumpur and that would have created chaos in the country.

Rahim resigned in January 1999 to take responsibility for the assault but only admitted in March that year to a royal commission of inquiry that he was personally responsible, adding that he was provoked after Anwar called him "the father of dogs."

Another reason Rahim held back his plea was to prevent further damage to the credibility of the entire police force, Kumaraendran said.

"He also did not want to give politicians further mileage to discredit the government and Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad," he said in submission before High Court judge Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin.

Rahim is appealing against the sentence of a two-month jail term for assaulting Anwar on Sept 20, 1998, while the latter was in a cell at the national police headquarters.

Sessions Court judge Akhtar Tahir on March 15 also fined Rahim RM2,000, which he paid the same day.

Rahim had pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of assault, under which he could have been jailed for up to a year.

Under the original charge of attempting to cause Anwar grievous hurt, he could have been jailed for three and a half years.

In the cross appeal, the prosecutors are asking for a longer jail term.

Royal commission

Apart from feeling intense remorse, Rahim had also relinquished his position as IGP, said Kamaraendran.

Kumaraendran said justice Akhtar did not consider the fact that evidence was not deduced from the trial but from the royal commission of inquiry that was held to investigate into Anwar's black eye injury.

He said that justice Akhtar would have been prejudiced by results of the royal commission because the judge had said, "Had it not been for the royal commission, he (Rahim) would not have pleaded guilty."

Kumaraedan, in his submission, also said that his client had fully cooperated with the royal commission of inquiry.

Wrong charge

When the hearing resumed after lunch today, justice Zulkefli dismissed Karpal's application in the morning to make a submission in the appeal case ([#1]Anwar's counsel applies to submit in former IGP's case[/#], Nov 10).

The court ruled that the appeal case should only be heard by two parties, namely, the prosecution (representing the state) and the defence (representing the accused) and not by counsel, Karpal, who is holding a watching brief for Anwar.

"Allowing counsel to make submissions during a watching brief is to practise an adversarial system and would jeopardise the appellant's right to a fair hearing," said Zulkefli.

"Therefore, I rule that the complainant's counsel (Karpal) has no right to make submissions unless invited to do so. He will be treated as a 'friend of the court' instead," he added.

Zulkefli then ordered Rahim's counsel Kumaraendran to submit on the appeal against the two-month custodial sentence imposed on Rahim under Section 323 of the Penal Code which carries a maximum penalty of 12 months' jail, RM2,000 fine or both.

Kumaraendran submitted that the charge was wrong, inappropriate and manifestly excessive.

He said that Rahim's sentence should be discounted because he (Rahim) had pleaded guilty on March 14 when given the first opportunity to do so.

Prosecutor Sallehuddin objected, saying that the sentence had already been discounted.

Mitigating factors

Kumaraendran maintained that justice Akhtar did not take into account several mitigating factors when passing the sentence.

One of the factors was that the accused had shown remorse and had even made a public apology in the press which had been accepted by the complainant's wife, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, who was reported to have said "I accept the apology, but let the law take its course".

He also said that the Sessions Court judge did not consider the implications of Rahim's guilty plea.

"Rahim had an honourable reason for holding back his plea. When the situation calmed down, he owned up and resigned from his post as IGP.

"Such resignation was voluntary and is never heard of before in this country," he added.

Kumaraendran said justice Akhtar also did not consider Rahim's good deeds while serving the country for the past 30 years.

Apart from his involvement with neutralising the communists insurgence and the Al-Arqam movement, Rahim also managed to contain crime to a lower rate and took good care of his subordinates' welfare. Rahim should be recognised for putting his life at stake for the country, said Kumaraendran.

Kumaraendran maintained that his client did not have the propensity to act violently. What happened that day occurred in "a spur of the moment".

This was objected to by prosecutor Sallehuddin who reminded the court that when Rahim pleaded guilty, he admitted having the intention to cause bodily hurt to Anwar.

Similar case

Kumaraendran then compared Rahim's case to that of former Kedah mentri besar Sanusi Junid's case in Sepang recently. He said the charge was the same and could be applied in Rahim's case.

Also charged under Section 323 of the Penal Code, Sanusi was fined RM1,000 by the Sepang magistrate's court on Sept 28 after he pleaded guilty to two charges of voluntarily causing hurt to two Kuala Lumpur International Airport employees.

Kumaraendran advised the court not to be clouded by the fact that Anwar was an ex-deputy prime minister and Rahim, an ex-IGP.

His submission was then interrupted by Zulkefli who requested that the counsel continue his submission at 9.15am tomorrow.

Previous story:

[#1]Former IGP ill, appeal put off[/#], Sept 18