PKR advisor Anwar Ibrahim will know on Jan 5 whether he can initiate a judicial review to challenge the prosecution's written statement that there are no favourable facts to be supplied to him in his sodomy case.

Justice Aziah Ali set the date in chambers after hearing submissions from Anwar's counsel Edmund Bon and senior federal counsel Azizah Nawawi.

NONE Anwar is seeking leave from the court to initiate a judicial review to quash a written statement signed by deputy public prosecutor Mohamad Hanafiah Zakaria which stated that there were no facts favouring the defence in his sodomy case.

He sought a mandamus order to compel the prosecution to supply him a written statement of facts favourable to him.

Anwar also wants a court order preventing the prosecution from proceeding with the sodomy case until those facts sought by him had been made available to him.

Anwar, 62, is accused of sodomising his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 24, at a condominium in Bukit Damansara here on June 26 last year.

The trial on his sodomy charge is set for a month beginning Jan 25 next year.

In urging the court to grant leave, Bon, in his written submission, said the respondents - Mohamad Hanafiah and the prosecution - had committed procedural impropriety when issuing the written statement.

He said Anwar was entitled under the law to a true and correct statement of favourable facts to enable him to defend himself properly and fully.

Matter not reviewable

Bon said the matter was judicially reviewable because the written statement purportedly made which states "tiada" (none) may mean that there were no favourable facts or it may also mean that there were favourable facts which were being withheld pursuant to the public interest immunity provision under the Criminal Procedure Code.

Azizah, in her written submission, argued that the written statement issued by Mohamad Hanafiah came within the jurisdiction of the criminal courts which the civil courts should not interfere with.

She said the matter was not reviewable as there was no decision made and that Mohamad Hanafiah merely formed an opinion that there were no facts favourable to Anwar.

"Therefore, this application is clearly frivolous and vexatious and an abuse of the court process. If there is no decision that the applicant is seeking to impugn, he cannot be said to be adversely affected by it," Azizah said in urging the court to dismiss Anwar's application.

She said any issue relating to the written statement could be raised during the criminal trial proceedings.

- Bernama