Claiming a miscarriage of justice, ?PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim today filed an application for a judicial review of the Feb 10 Federal Court decision on Sodomy II, for which he has been jailed for five years.
Anwar cited the unusually prompt statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office following his conviction and the Umno roadshow held after that featuring his case prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah (below, left), among reasons for the application.
He said he believed there was nothing before the court for it to convict and sentence him, owing to the conflicting evidence on the carpet – purportedly where the alleged incident occurred – which was moved to another unit.
His application for the review was filed by lawyers N Surendran and Michelle Yesudas. Also present was Anwar’s daughter, Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar.
Anwar, 67, wants the rulings of the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court in convicting him to be set aside.
His lawyers cited Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules for the review of the application that was filed about 11am today.
Anwar, in his affidavit supporting the application, questioned the swiftness of the PMO in issuing its statement on the Federal Court verdict of Feb 10, which he argued gave the impression to the public that the PMO knew the decision before its pronouncement.
Shafee’s conduct at roadshows questioned
“Further it is not a practice for the PMO to issue such a statement in a criminal appeal and it has not happened before in the past in any case. There is no special reason in issuing such a statement.
“I respectfully say it is the abnormality in the conduct of the PMO has caused me grave injustice,” the former opposition leader said.
Anwar further questioned Shafee’s conduct in having the roadshow following his conviction alleging that it was backed by Umno the ruling party.
He maintained that Umno is part of the claim of political conspiracy made against him, which was made by none other than Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak himself.
On the carpet used as evidence, defence counsel and former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram said the alleged offence was said to have taken place in condo unit 11-5-1, but the carpet submitted to the court was seized from unit 11-5-2.
‘No evidence carpet was moved’
“The prosecution claimed that the carpet was moved but there is no evidence to suggest that. I do not believe in flying carpets,” the senior lawyer had said.
Based on this matter alone, Gopal argued, the sodomy incident did not occurred.
Anwar further cited it was wrong for the court not to accept the evidence of an independent witness Dr Mohd Osman Abdul Hamid, as he was not a witness with any interest in the matter.
He further claimed inconsistency in Saiful’s evidence, in which the accuser testified that the underwear he wore on that fateful day was washed by his mother, but yet the prosecution tendered another of Saiful’s underwear with seminal stains on it.
“Incredibly, the underwear tendered was not the underwear Saiful wore and this renders his evidence as totally unreliable,” Anwar argues in his application.
He also questioned investigating officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira’s conduct in removing the samples taken from Saiful, which had been placed in a plastic bag, and re-labelling them.
“Yet the Federal Court ruled there was no break in the chain of evidence,” he said.
Anwar also questioned the court’s rejection of defence witness Dr Thomas Hoogland’s evidence that he (Anwar) was labouring intense back pain and could not have committed the purported (sex) act, but yet it accepted evidence from Hospital Kuala Lumpur’s Dr Jeyaindran Sinnadurai.
Later, outside the court, Nurul Izzah told reporters that they would continue to fight for Anwar, whom she described as a political prisoner as the family believed him to be innocent.