‘Flawed, incomplete and full of gaps’: Court urged to throw out case against Yusoff Rawther

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has been told that it has no choice but to dismiss the case against Muhammed Yusoff Rawther, the former research assistant to Anwar Ibrahim who was charged under drugs and firearms laws following a controversial police raid on his car in September last year.

The defence said the police investigation was flawed from the outset and hampered by conflicting statements from prosecution witnesses, resulting in Yusoff being denied a fair trial as guaranteed by the constitution.

The defence also addressed an anonymous call to the police in the early hours of Sept 6 last year, in which the police received specific details of Yusoff’s car parked outside his home.

“It was a very specific tip-off. It contained precise information about the Nissan Teana PMH6931, including the exact location where the car was parked. This was admitted by police witnesses,” the defence in more than 50 pages of written submission to the court yesterday.

The defence referred to a similar case from 1992, in which the court acquitted a man who had been arrested after police found packages of heroin in his car.

In that case, the court had ruled that mere knowledge of the presence of the items was not sufficient to prove possession, and that the defendant’s behaviour before or at the time of his arrest was not suspicious.

In the cited case, the coutrt had also noted that the items had not been dusted for fingerprints to establish if the accused had come into contact with traces of heroin.

By comparison, the defence argued that Yusoff was not even in the car at the time of the raid.

“Therefore, the defence is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the element of the accused person’s knowledge in this case,” it added.

Yusoff, the grandson of the late Penang consumer advocate SM Mohamed Idris, is charged under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and Section 36 of the Firearms Act.

The 32-year-old, who worked as Anwar’s research assistant at the politician’s bungalow office in Bukit Gasing, Petaling Jaya in 2018 before he lodged a police report, and later, a lawsuit alleging that the PKR leader sexually assaulted him in October 2018, has consistenly denied any knowledge of the two pistols and 305g of cannabis that police said were found in his car.

Throughout the investigation and trial, Yusoff maintained that he was framed by people in power who harbour a grudge against him due to his ongoing civil suit for sexual assault against Anwar.

He has filed two police reports with names of people to be investigated, including Anwar’s former political secretary Farhash Wafa Salvador. Police have yet to comment on the status of the reports.

In its submission, the defence also recalled the questioning of a police witness who was asked about Anwar’s 2020 statement in which he said that he would not forgive Yusoff.

The witness, investigating officer Aiman Suhaimi, also agreed when reminded that Anwar had since assumed the most powerful position in the country.

Aiman further agreed with the defence’s suggestion that Anwar may still not have forgiven Yusoff and the prime minister may harbour a grudge against him.

The defence said another police witness, Muhd Zuhairi Md Zuhir, admitted that no fingerprints were collected from the items found in Yusoff’s car.

Zuhairi was asked about the fact that Anwar or his aides had never been questioned by police during the investigation, even though the police were aware about Anwar’s statement that he would not forgive Yusoff.

In addition, the defence pointed out that the CCTV cameras at the two locations where the police found the items – Jalan Bukit Kiara and outside the police headquarters in Kuala Lumpur – were either non-existent or not working.

“Why did the investigating officers not look into the other facts such as revenge and ‘planting drugs and pistols’ which are closely related to the cases or issues that already exist between the accused and the people he named?

“We therefore submit that the police investigation, which was incomplete, selective and deeply flawed, prejudiced the defendant’s right to a fair trial,” said the defence.

It said there were major gaps in the prosecution’s case, particularly in relation to Yusoff’s possession and control of the Nissan Teana car before the drugs and firearms were found during the raid.

“We submit that the accused should not be called to enter defence simply to fill these gaps,” it added.

The court is expected to announce its decision on June 12.