The prosecution in the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial has reiterated that it operates on a "need-to-know" basis.

 This meant that not all of its DPPs, including ousted junior DPP Farah Azlina Latif, were given briefings or had access to vital documents which include witness statements and reports.

NONE It is learnt this was stated in an affidavit-in-reply from the prosecution, in response to Anwar's latest application to strike out the charge on the basis that Farah could have shared vital information with star witness Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan ( left ).

Only four prosecutors have access to such documents and they do not include Farah. The prosecution asserts Farah was not involved in any of the prosecution's briefings or meetings for them to map out strategies.

They maintained that the prosecution's "integrity and impartiality" remain intact, despite the allegations of an ‘affair' between Farah and complainant and star witness Saiful, as they do not have access to such vital documents or information.

"The striking-out application has no merits or justification as nowhere would the said ‘affair' between the two affect the integrity and impartiality of the prosecution," the affidavit states.

The affidavit was affirmed by DPP Mohd Hanafiah Zakaria, the deputy head of prosecution division in charge of operations, where he is in charge of monitoring the investigation papers to the case which are all in the custody of investigating officer Supt Jude Blacious Pereira.

Jude, in a separate affidavit, affirmed that he had never received instructions or orders to give any of the documents in his keeping to Farah. He also states copies were only given to solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden, Hanafiah and DPPs Nordin Hassan and Noorin Badaruddin.

The prosecution had submitted two affidavits-in-reply yesterday, one by Hanafiah and the other by Jude in response to Anwar's application to strike out the charge.

pkr taman ehsan selayang ceramah 020810 anwar Anwar ( right ), had in his affidavit alleged a possible breach of the Official Secrets Act 1972, with Farah and Saiful allegedly having an affair.

Farah was removed from the prosecution's team by attorney-general Abddul Gani Patail after allegations surfaced about her alleged affair with Saiful.

Personal knowledge

The prosecution, in its affidavit, reiterated that what Saiful had testified was based on what had allegedly happened to him during the said sodomy incident, as it was based on his personal knowledge and not that from any other party.

They also claimed that what was reported was within public knowledge before Farah joined its prosecution team, replacing another officer, as copies of Saiful's police report has been published on the web and in the print media.

Saiful's oath ceremony, the prosecutors stated, was also within public knowledge as it had also been heavily reported in the media.

Reiterating that Farah's role was limited only to note-taking, they said she did not have access or reason to access such documents.

Hanafiah also states the attorney-general's chambers top management was still investigating claims of the alleged ‘affair' and proper action would be taken if there was proof.

Anwar's lawyers are expected to submit their affidavit to reply to the prosecution's affidavits tomorrow.

The striking-out application will be heard before trial judge Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah on Monday.