politics

Malaysia's Anwar shocked after being barred entry into Japan

61 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

61 Comments
Login to comment

Well if they are going to block people from coming to Japan because of corruption, Japanese politicians had better not make any more international trips!

And sodomy? What year is this?

The original charge against him was sodomy, although the only proof of this that I am aware is that somebody claimed it in a book. Then they later charged him with corruption for allegedly interfering with police investigations concerning the sodomy charge. He served jail for this silliness.

Those immigration clowns just made Japan look really stupid.

22 ( +24 / -3 )

A court acquitted Anwar in 2012 but the government has appealed.

So, he is no longer convicted. It is also clear to anyone familar with the story that Anwar was set up from the beginning.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

I cannot believe Japan did that! I thought Japan was a democratic...

8 ( +10 / -2 )

What an embarrassment!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Wouldn't be shocked if there are possible Malaysian business considerations.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Wow that was a pole in the EYE.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Was declaring Anwar persona non grata in consideration to the present Malaysian government?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The controversial conviction, which cast the then-rising political star out of Malaysia’s longtime ruling party and into jail for six years, is viewed by many as a set-up by Anwar’s enemies.

It was obviously a stitch-up, but once you start making exceptions for people with convictions it becomes impossible to enforce your rules. I do notice Paul McCartney was let in for his recent concerts, despite his drug bust in Japan.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

“It is not the way for a democratic country to treat an opposition political leader and a veteran politician.”

I agree. The charges were bogus, and that is why he was acquitted. Besides, "he was invited by a Japanese NGO to deliver a speech on religious harmony, " which is a good thing, not something that we should be protected from.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

but once you start making exceptions for people with convictions it becomes impossible to enforce your rules.

Yes, but Anwar was acquitted in 2012. Thus, there were actually no rules to enforce in this case.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Guilty until proven.......just guilty!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Anwar's opponent former PM Mahathir has praised Japan while condemning the West, including the context of the Pacific War. That has made him a ally of the Japanese right-wingers, who are now in power in Japan. I suspect this dynamic is behind the Japanese government' bizarre, illogical (Anwar was acquitted) decision.

In political terms, Japan is becoming a second-world nation.

BTW, is sodomy illegal in Japan?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Anwar said he was invited by a Japanese NGO to deliver a speech on religious harmony. He returned to Malaysia on Sunday.

Aha....Religious Harmony in Malaysia? That's it! You can do all the probing and analyze Mr. Anwar (no pun intended) ...we just don't accept such BS here in Japan.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Might is right. Until Anwar prevails over his opponents, pragmatic not to offend winning.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hang on a second ladies and gentlemen. If Anwar failed to declare his past convictions in his documentation then the boot may well be on the other foot. Anwar would then have made a false declaration IN JAPAN, which is in itself a criminal offense, and they would have every reason to politely show him the door.

It doesn't say if what type of passport he was traveling on, but if it was a regular passport then there's no reason for the immigration people to not apply the normal rules.

Politicians are NOT above the law, whatever they may believe. If the law of Japan says that you need to declare past convictions then not doing so is EXTREMELY disrespectful to Japan, and Anwar deserves to be bounced.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

If Anwar failed to declare his past convictions in his documentation then the boot may well be on the other foot.

Again, he was acquitted in 2012. There are no convictions to declare.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@slumdog

ibrahim was aquitted of a second sodomy charge, not the initial one. he lost his appeal of the first conviction. although his case screams of foul play, japan and other countries can use it to bar him from entry.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The sign of things to come when Abe's "Secrecy Bill" takes effect this December!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ibrahim was aquitted of a second sodomy charge, not the initial one. he lost his appeal of the first conviction. although his case screams of foul play, japan and other countries can use it to bar him from entry.

1998 sodomy conviction overturned in 2004. 2008 conviction overturned in 2012.

From Wikipedia:

The first trial was held in 1998, and resulted in former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim being convicted, and given a nine-year prison sentence. This verdict was overturned in 2004, resulting in Anwar's release from prison. While the leader of the Pakatan Rakyat opposition, Anwar was charged in 2008 with sodomising a male aide. He was tried in 2010 and 2011 and, in January 2012, was acquitted.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 09:33AM JST Again, he was acquitted in 2012. There are no convictions to declare.

Please re-read the article. You don't have to read far, just the second line:

he was barred because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy and corruption.

Anwar was tried and convicted. If Anwar failed to declare the convictions, as it appears he did since the Japanese authorities were unaware of these convictions, then the validity of the convictions in Malaysia becomes irrelevant. Anwar committed a crime in Japan, namely making a false declaration. This would have been more sufficient grounds to deny him entry.

That Anwar is trying to make himself out as the victim here is ridiculous and shows a profound lack of respect for Japan's laws. All he had to do was declare the convictions, submit a covering letter explaining that they were politically motivated, and politely ask for Japan to disregard the convictions for visa purposes. Failing to do so puts Anwar simply and clearly in the wrong. Anwar trying to make himself out as the victim when HE knowingly made a false declaration is simply ridiculous... what is even more ridiculous is that so many of you fell for this ridiculous line of logic.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

also from wiki:

The sodomy verdict was partially overturned in 2004, resulting in Anwar's release from prison as he had already served his sentence for the corruption offence. not overturned.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

My point of view is that it would be good if some japanese authority appear gently declaring it was a mistake of a "non-effective" immigration personnal/system. If Japan really wants to consolidate itself as a global power and influence the rest of the world then it must incentivate people to talk, to express its opinions. It must be a place where every human being can find a home.

My way of seeing it is that if a person is unwanted in the country, its people must bar him, and not the system. The system should impose restriction only in more severe subjects as the last weapon to solve a conflict or problem. If the people can not do that, then the society has a problem, it is a weak society. This is one of the reasons the United States and most of the western countries are powerful. Each individual of these countries are strong and they do not depend on the system to survive or to do the right thing. If you depend on rules is because you don't have the necessary education to behave correctly without these rules controlling your behaviours. A solid society is the one that is completely free.

Albert Eisten was politically persecuted in Germany before he moved to the United States. I think history show us we cannot give our back to any single person in this world.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Anwar was tried and convicted.

Frungy,

Seriously? Again, the verdict was overturned in 2004. I don't need to read the article. I know the story already, as do most of the posters commenting. Care to join us?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

"*Hang on a second ladies and gentlemen. If Anwar failed to declare his past convictions in his documentation then the boot may well be on the other foot. Anwar would then have made a false declaration IN JAPAN, which is in itself a criminal offense, and they would have every reason to politely show him the door. "*

I assume you are just speculating about him not declaring his past during his previous visits, or do you have proof?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Frungy:

the Japanese authorities were unaware of these convictions

Article:

Anwar said Japan’s embassy in Malaysia told him before the trip there would be no problem entering the country. Embassy officials declined comment.

Who to believe? Will the KL embassy comment, and cause immigration to lose face? How far up the food chain does this go?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

lost his appeal of the first conviction. although his case screams of foul play, japan and other countries can use it to bar him from entry.

As has been noted a couple of times, the first conviction was overturned in 2004. Thus, there seems to have been absolutely no reason to bar him from entry.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Its totally weird. The man is an important person, not guilty of anything ,a political leader but is denied entry to Japan because of a "recent report" ? Japanese immigration officials are all judges?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Yes, immigration authorities in Japan and most other countries in the world have a wide range of authority. Read the immigration laws for your own country and you'll be surprised the amount of power immigration and customs officers have.

He wasn't coming with a diplomatic status, he was trying to enter as a personal citizen.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 10:29AM JST Seriously? Again, the verdict was overturned in 2004. I don't need to read the article. I know the story already, as do most of the posters commenting. Care to join us?

No, because you're mistaken on two key points:

The verdict not all the sodomy charge were "overturned" in 2004. It was "partially overturned". Partially.

There were TWO separate charges. The corruption conviction was appealed and the conviction was upheld.

This means that Anwar still has convictions for sodomy and corruption.

So, I decline your kind invitation to join "us", because "us" are mistaken about the facts.

marcelitoJan. 21, 2014 - 10:32AM JST I assume you are just speculating about him not declaring his past during his previous visits, or do you have proof?

If you read the article:

he was barred because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy and corruption. and Japanese immigration officials told him vaguely they were responding to a recent “report” involving him.

It seems, from the report, that up until this time the Japanese immigration were unaware of the 1999 convictions for sodomy and corruption, and that these had only recently been reported to them.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Partially

Nope. The conviction overturned. Not partially. Overturned, completely. He had already served most of the sentence for the conviction that was overturned, but it was overturned nonetheless.

http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/printfriendly.pl?http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1190999.htm

"It's good to be free" - the words of the Malaysian Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim after the country's highest court unexpectedly upheld his appeal against a six year sentence for sodomy.

2.There were TWO separate charges.

Yes, and has been stated several times now, the first one was overturned and he was acquitted of the second. In other words, he was found not guilty in both cases.

So, I decline your kind invitation to join "us", because "us" are mistaken about the facts.

Sorry, but you are unsurprising mistaken again and stubbornly so this time, too. Don't you like to read?

The man has not been presently found guilty by the Malaysian government. Again, in case you did not read it the first several times it has been mentioned, the first conviction was overturned and he was acquitted of the second one. There was and is no reason to have barred him from entering Japan.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Day of shame for Japan.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You have all missed the point. This has nothing to do with whether Anwar was convicted or not. Of course he was never guilty. He has a beautiful wife who stands by him and beautiful and intelligent daughters.. I am sure the Japanese authorities know all these. But Japan needs Malaysia to buy their Shinkansen know how and to stand together with Japan over China. So Anwar has to be sacrificed. Letting him in and making noises against the Malaysian government will drive Najib to China. I can understand the action as Japan needs to keep as many people at her side as possible! Anwar is smart. He will now embarrass the Malaysian government by asking for an inquiry!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Frungy - "If you read the article: he was barred because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy and corruption. and Japanese immigration officials told him vaguely they were responding to a recent “report” involving him. It seems, from the report, that up until this time the Japanese immigration were unaware of the 1999 convictions for sodomy and corruption, and that these had only recently been reported to them."

No it doesnt - again it is only pure speculation on your part to say the J immigration was unaware of those issues on the previous THREE occasions he visited Japan -Anwar is a high profile indivdual , not an average Joe like you and me. If i wanted to entertain speculation myself Id say ( as was already pointed out above ) that there are possible big project tender contracts for J-Inc companies in Malaysia coming up ( eg. high speed rail link between KL and Singapore ) and this rejection is a behind the scenes move to ingratiate Japan with the current Malaysian political leadership.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Whatever the background it was a shockingly bad decision by Japan. Public explanation required from the Foreign Ministry or whoever was responsible.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Anwar said he arrived at Narita International Airport on a personal visit early Sunday and was told by immigration authorities he was barred because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy and corruption"

Malaysia aint truly asia, its a very corrupt, gangsterdom, country, cant even get your DHL packages without items missing, and they have different rent prices for ethnicity, and visa status...and getting a visa is like venturing into a black market..not to mention the abundance of lady boys....and its supposed to be an "Islamic country"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'd actually say all of that precisely makes it truly Asia. You find most of those things in most Asian countries.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Well, Japan in doing this has probably succeeding in doing what it did not want -- agreeing to current Malaysian government in turn with them taking a stronger stance against China (is my guess). Now if this guy were to win an election, whom do you think he'll turn to? Ah, irony. Well done, Japan!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 11:59AM JST Nope. The conviction overturned. Not partially. Overturned, completely. He had already served most of the sentence for the conviction that was overturned, but it was overturned nonetheless.

http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/printfriendly.pl?http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1190999.htm

I'll see your example of sloppy reporting and raise you 3 sources of better reporting:

Anwar was jailed and finally released in 2004, when the sodomy charge was partially overturned. Source: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/malaysiaelections/2013/05/201351125934750972.html

The Malaysian government has been after Ibraham for the past decade now, jailing him, convicting him of sodomy (that is, of homosexuality) once–a verdict that was partially overturned–and is now trying him again. Source: http://swampland.time.com/2010/02/15/free-anwar-ibrahim/

This verdict was partially overturned in 2004, resulting in Anwar’s release from prison. Source: http://www.malaysia-today.net/anwar-battered-but-still-battling/

The conviction was PARTIALLY overturned. The news report you cited was sloppy with their terminology.

2.There were TWO separate charges.

Yes, and has been stated several times now, the first one was overturned and he was acquitted of the second. In other words, he was found not guilty in both cases.

I note you don't cite a source for this... quite probably because you're mistaken:

Although the point was by now moot, an appeal on the corruption charges was heard on 6 September 2004. Under Malaysian law a person is banned from political activities for five years after the end of his sentence. Success in this appeal would have allowed him to return to politics immediately. On 7 September, the court agreed to hear Anwar's appeal. However, on 15 September, the of Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that its previous decision to uphold a High Court ruling that found Anwar guilty was in order, relegating Anwar to the sidelines of Malaysian politics until 14 April 2008. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_Ibrahim#Years_in_prison_and_subsequent_release

On September 15, 2004, the Federal Court decided that it was not prepared to review its previous decision, made in 2002, to uphold Mr. Anwar’s conviction on charges of corruption on the grounds that his application to the court had “no merit.” All legal channels available to Mr. Anwar to have his first conviction (for corruption) overturned have now been exhausted. Source: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/humanrights/Cases/CHR_068423.htm

Sorry, but you are unsurprising mistaken again and stubbornly so this time, too. Don't you like to read?

I beg to differ, it is you who are mistaken.

The man has not been presently found guilty by the Malaysian government. Again, in case you did not read it the first several times it has been mentioned, the first conviction was overturned and he was acquitted of the second one. There was and is no reason to have barred him from entering Japan.

And again I must point out that you are mistaken. The 1999 convictions for which he was refused entry have not been overturned. The sodomy charge was partially overturned, and the corruption conviction was not overturned at all.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

its a a very slim chance he get elected, because of the sodomy act...in an Islamic country...many there have written him off.... the peeps their keep him tied to the opposition party-which is a big deal there.

Malaysia is predominantly govt composed of Malay's, the Chinese run most of the businesses, and the Indians, and other south east Asians dominate the labor force. But lately there is serious friction between the 3 main ethnicities. See the SNG incident in little India. Africans there suffer as whole there too.

BTW they drive crazy there too...scooters and cars drive impatiently mad....and don't be surprised when your waiting in a line, and somebody cuts in front of you like you're not there. In the center of KL they have rampant prostitution,(Islamic?) I went into an HSBC bank bld and found hooker operations on some floors. There are hardly any clubs where you can go and not meet othere than lady boy, or hooks..The Taxi drivers are quite notorious too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan a democratic country? The word has always been very loosely applied here

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Oh, for Pete's sake, Frungy,

He was accused of corruption and sodomy. The sodomy charge was overturned, but the corruption charge wasn't, which was what kept him out of politics. That's why you are reading that the conviction was "partially overturned."

"On 14 April 1999, Anwar was sentenced to six years in prison for corruption and, on 8 August 2000, nine years in prison for sodomy. The sentences were to be served consecutively, and Anwar was given no credit for the six months he spent in jail during the trial. The following year, Anwar's corruption conviction was upheld by Malaysia's Court of Appeal. In July 2002, Anwar lost his final appeal against the corruption conviction in the Federal Court. In September 2004 the Federal Court overturned his sodomy conviction.[13]"

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Frungy,

You wrote:

1.The verdict not all the sodomy charge were "overturned" in 2004. It was "partially overturned". Partially.

Again, you are wrong. All of the sodomy charges in both the cases were overturned and he was acquitted both times. There was absolutely no partial acquittal for sodomy. Speaking of 'sloppy'.

The man has been railroaded from the beginning and I don't even like him all that much. However, the truth is the courts have been used to keep him on the sidelines and Japan seems to be backing this up.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Yes, but Anwar was acquitted in 2012. Thus, there were actually no rules to enforce in this case.

Depends whether Jimmigration goes by convictions or arrests. If it goes by arrests and he didn't report his arrest, then Jimmigration's actions are more understandable.

Good stuff, btw, Frungy.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

If it goes by arrests and he didn't report his arrest, then Jimmigration's actions are more understandable.

Actually, I disagree. The Japanese government has been well aware of the Anwar trials because they, as did other countries, sent diplomats to watch and follow the first trial, which was widely believed to be a kangaroo trial.

Good stuff, btw, Frungy.

Yes, he is quite the comedian.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

FarmboyJan. 21, 2014 - 02:59PM JST Oh, for Pete's sake, Frungy, He was accused of corruption and sodomy. The sodomy charge was overturned, but the corruption charge wasn't, which was what kept him out of politics. That's why you are reading that the conviction was "partially overturned."

Perhaps you should read the sources I provided again:

Anwar was jailed and finally released in 2004, when the sodomy charge was partially overturned.

Source: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/spotlight/malaysiaelections/2013/05/201351125934750972.html

The Malaysian government has been after Ibraham for the past decade now, jailing him, convicting him of sodomy (that is, of homosexuality) once–a verdict that was partially overturned–and is now trying him again.

Source: http://swampland.time.com/2010/02/15/free-anwar-ibrahim/

These reports state SPECIFICALLY that the sodomy charge was partially overturned. If you did a little reading you'd realise that these charges were only partially overturned because more charges were added later (on the basis of other evidence), and only the original charges (based on the book) were overturned.

Of course that's all irrelevant since the corruption conviction remains and that alone would be enough to deny him entry under Japan's immigration laws.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

These reports state SPECIFICALLY that the sodomy charge was partially overturned.

The partial refers to part of the charges being overturned. The corruption sentence was already served. So, if the charges were only 'partially' overturned as the articles you presented state, why was he released early? Based on what exactly?

Of course that's all irrelevant since the corruption conviction remains and that alone would be enough to deny him entry under Japan's immigration laws.

Here you would have a point if Japan was not one of the countries observing his trial. There is no way the Japanese government was not aware of the either of the charges.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 04:06PM JST The partial refers to part of the charges being overturned. The corruption sentence was already served. So, if the charges were only 'partially' overturned as the articles you presented state, why was he released early? Based on what exactly?

Do I look like an expert on Sharia Law? I don't know.

What I do know is that you were wrong about the both the corruption and sodomy charges being dismissed. Then you were wrong about all the sodomy charges being dismissed. Give it up.

Here you would have a point if Japan was not one of the countries observing his trial. There is no way the Japanese government was not aware of the either of the charges.

Oh yes, of course all workers in the Japanese government share a hive mind and all know everything that everyone else knows. ... Oh wait, they don't. In fact the Japanese government is notorious for its poor communication between divisions.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I don't know if the corruption charges are true. But lets assume they are. Are you shocked that a man would use his authority to try and evade charges for which he was not guilty?

Some instantly say that he should just let the court/ police system do its job, but obviously they didn't, since he went to jail for sodomy then later had that bit over-turned.

Obviously, there is not nearly enough justice here. The guy was getting railroaded, as proven by the fact that he WAS railroaded. All those charges should have been overturned.

Saying anything else is like jailing a man for breaking and entering into an empty mountain hut in winter time rather than freeze to death like a good citizen. Why would you even lay such charges, let alone leave them on the man's record?

I would fight fire with fire myself. So would you.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What I do know is that you were wrong about the both the corruption and sodomy charges being dismissed.

No, I have been discussing the sodomy charges, which seems to be the main focus of the article. I don't believe I have discussed the corruption until my post directly above. I am correct about Anwar being acquitted fully of all of the sodomy convictions.

Then you were wrong about all the sodomy charges being dismissed.

I don't know which sodomy charges you are talking about. He was acquitted of all the sodomy convictions and the more recent sodomy charges were also dismissed although the government has appealed the latest charges. Seems they do not want to give up. You keep claiming only part of the sodomy charges were overturned. Which part? Why was he released early? The partial refers to the corruption part. Anwar was hoping to be acquitted for both.

Oh yes, of course all workers in the Japanese government share a hive mind and all know everything that everyone else knows.

One would hope they were aware of government policy. However, until we get a solid comment from the Japanese government, it is actually quite hard to say what happened. I do know the Japanese government sent observers to the trial. It was and is hardly a secret to the Japanese government.

Give it up.

Why should I? I am correct. The man's sodomy convictions were fully overturned.

The guy was getting railroaded, as proven by the fact that he WAS railroaded. All those charges should have been overturned.

Absolutely. The man was beaten by the police chief when he was arrested and the chief had to apologize and pay an unspecified amount.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 05:38PM JST No, I have been discussing the sodomy charges, which seems to be the main focus of the article. I don't believe I have discussed the corruption until my post directly above. I am correct about Anwar being acquitted fully of all of the sodomy convictions.

No, the main focus of the article is Anwar being denied entry to Japan. The reason is his criminal convictions. You're ignoring the corruption conviction because it doesn't fit your story.

Once again you are ignoring ANYTHING that doesn't fit your argument, no matter how often or pointedly your attention is drawn to it.

Face facts, Anwar has, at minimum, a conviction for corruption. This alone is enough to keep him out of Japan, being a criminal conviction.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

No, the main focus of the article is Anwar being denied entry to Japan.

Very true, but the big story with this has always been the sodomy charges and convictions.

You're ignoring the corruption conviction because it doesn't fit your story.

No, I was just discussing what I was discussing. I don't have a 'story'. I am reading and following events just as I assume you are. In addition, I am still correct about the total overturning of the sodomy convictions as are the other posters in this discussion who were saying the same thing.>Face facts, Anwar has, at minimum, a conviction for corruption. This alone is enough to keep him out of Japan, being a criminal conviction.

I have checked recent reports in the local press and it was both convictions and time spent in prison. According to the Japanese Embassy in Malaysia, Anwar had applied for special permission to enter the country the previous times he visited. The Japanese Embassy is saying he did not apply for the special permission this time.

I still believe that he was and is being railroaded in Malaysia. However, if it is true that he applied for special permission before coming to Japan on his previous visits, it stands to reason he would have known it was required for this visit. So, whether we believe the treatment he has received is fair or not, it is hard to believe he would be 'shocked' by being denied entry this time.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 07:26PM JST I have checked recent reports in the local press and it was both convictions and time spent in prison.

Local press where? Because I quoted a Malaysian newspaper and they stated:

This verdict was partially overturned in 2004, resulting in Anwar’s release from prison. Source: http://www.malaysia-today.net/anwar-battered-but-still-battling/

However, if it is true that he applied for special permission before coming to Japan on his previous visits, it stands to reason he would have known it was required for this visit. So, whether we believe the treatment he has received is fair or not, it is hard to believe he would be 'shocked' by being denied entry this time.

Well, at least we agree here. Anwar is in the wrong in this case. I don't like the way he was treated by his government, but just because he's been the victim before doesn't mean he's the victim every time, and in this case it was his own fault for not organising the required special permission (which is a phrase that might mean anything from him failing to organise a visa to him failing to obtain a waiver for his previous convictions).

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Japan almost 15 years ago declined the entry of an editor in chief of a national newspaper just because he looked like iranian. this is true. officials asked him to count and he did but they were not convinced. i was questioned on my entry as well. but yes i did it twice:)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Because I quoted a Malaysian newspaper and they stated:

The quote function did not work. I was responding to this:

Face facts, Anwar has, at minimum, a conviction for corruption. This alone is enough to keep him out of Japan, being a criminal conviction.

I was talking about the current story and the claimed reasons for him being barred from entry into Japan.

As to your link, different news outfits now look back and describe the convictions and acquittals differently. However, the reports of the time were specific in that he was acquitted and there is no mention of it being partial.

But though he won his appeal against his conviction for sodomy, Mr Anwar will be barred from standing for office for almost four years unless his other conviction, for abuse of power, is also overturned.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3627810.stm

The country's highest court overturned his conviction for sodomy on Thursday.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3623500.stm

Well, at least we agree here.

I bet if you look carefully enough that you will see that there are probably many areas where we can find agreement. Try to keep positive :)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

slumdogJan. 21, 2014 - 08:54PM JST

Face facts, Anwar has, at minimum, a conviction for corruption. This alone is enough to keep him out of Japan, being a criminal conviction.

I was talking about the current story and the claimed reasons for him being barred from entry into Japan.

This IS the current story. As I indicated earlier, the very second line of the JT article makes reference to the corruption conviction. Yet somehow you always manage to not see this. I find it amazing how you can read some things, but your brain just refuses to accept anything that would mean you are wrong. I'm not being unkind or insulting, but have you considered seeking professional help?

As to your link, different news outfits now look back and describe the convictions and acquittals differently. However, the reports of the time were specific in that he was acquitted and there is no mention of it being partial.

This is common. It is not that the story has changed or the first reports were incorrect, rather that the newspapers were sloppy with their reporting. They're referencing second and third-hand sources. If you want an accurate account then you speak to eye witnesses, not their third cousin twice-removed who heard about it down at the pub. This is WHY I included a Malaysian newspaper article, because it is closer to the source.

Your position that a Malaysian newspaper reporter who stood in the court room while the verdict was being delivered is less reliable than a BBC reporter writing an article from a second or third hand syndicate report is ... well, seek professional help.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Yet somehow you always manage to not see this

What is the matter with you? I was agreeing with you. I was just stating that a local Malaysian newspaper quoted a Japanese Embassy person as saying it was both because he had a conviction and also because he had spent more than in prison.

I find it amazing how you can read some things

You are always rude. I see this is no exception. You really should apologize.

This is WHY I included a Malaysian newspaper article, because it is closer to the source.

Your source was from 2011. Your others were from 2013 and 2010. Mine was from the actual time when it happened, 2004. Do you have anything from then to support your claim that there was a partial sodomy acquittal?

If you want an accurate account then you speak to eye witnesses,

You mean like the author "Masterwordsmith" who wrote the article you linked at Malaysia Today?

Yes, that sure is some "eyewitness"

The Time's link was an editorial, not a news report. The man was completely acquitted. If not, show me the part that he was not acquitted of.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Frungy,

Articles, including this one, constantly have been saying he was refused entry because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy. Then they go on to talk about other sodomy charges in 2008. Then buried in the articles in the fact that he was acquitted. If he was acquitted, then why is it claimed that he was denied because of the conviction?

Anwar said he arrived at Narita International Airport on a personal visit early Sunday and was told by immigration authorities he was barred because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy and corruption.

Again, that is what my problem with this has been. He was acquitted of the sodomy charge and yet it is still being stated as one of the reasons why he was denied entry.

Now as to your history of rudeness certainly did not start today. Just the other day you were extremely rude to another poster for the mere fact that they disagreed with you. You were extremely rude to me in our discussions about the Japanese constitution regarding the Emperor and the fact that the term insane is not a medical term. In both cases, you were not only rude, but you were incorrectly so. Here also, what you did what write something extremely personally rude and something that had absolutely nothing to do witht article. You frequently do this. My comments are about this story and in this case I was agreeing with you. That did not stop you from completely misreading what I wrote and doing so in a very rude way.

There was no partial sodomy acquittal. The trial was for corruption and sodomy in 1999 in which he was convicted of both. In 2004, he was acquitted of the sodomy charges completely. He was not acquitted of the corruption charges. Yet, this article, the quotes from immigration and the Japanese Embassy, all suggest he was denied entry because of a conviction that was overturned.

As to my original comments to you, you wrote in one of your first posts:

Please re-read the article. You don't have to read far, just the second line:

he was barred because of his 1999 conviction for sodomy and corruption.

He was acquitted of the sodomy charges, yet you and this article seem to think it is okay to say he was barred because of the convictions for sodomy. Do you see my problem now. Am I being clear enough?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Long story short he didnt have a VISA to enter nor did he even apply for onr thats why he got barred entry.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

no surprise here... Mr Abe is courting Malaysia for there support in fighting China. I scratch your back, you scratch mine...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obviously, there is not nearly enough justice here. The guy was getting railroaded, as proven by the fact that he WAS railroaded. All those charges should have been overturned.

It's not up to Jimmigration to check on the legitimacy of convictions in foreign countries.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I think japanese government official is way off in this matter . this incident is totally unwarranted and stupid. malaysia government lately have done a lot idiot remarks on matter that make malaysia look fool in history and cultures.. may abe cabinet minister lost their mind just like their prime minister doing a lot of stupid remarks

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites