The Federal Court's pending decision on Anwar Ibrahim's appeal against his conviction and sentence for corrupt practices is the litmus test for the independence of the judiciary, says Free Anwar Campaign (FAC) director Raja Petra Kamarudin.

He said although Chief Justice Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah should be commended for enhancing the public confidence in the judiciary since his appointment in late 2000, all that will crumble if the court dismisses Anwar's appeal without merit.

"Judgments like the Likas election petition by High Court judge Muhammad Kamil Awang and lawyer Zainur Zakaria's appeal to the Federal Court indicated that the judiciary is reformed, but it is Anwar's appeal which will convince the people that the judiciary is free from any political pressure," he said.

He said those who have attended Anwar's appeal would have heard the questions posed by Dzaiddin, Sabah and Sarawak Chief Judge Steve Shim and Federal Court judge Haidar Mohd Nor) and would know that the judges seemed convinced that Anwar was innocent.

"If the judges were to decide otherwise, the public will know it's not their real decision. Now is the best time for him (Dzaiddin) to prove that the judiciary is truly independent and free from political interference," said Raja Petra.

He said this in a phone interview with malaysiakini in reference to his article published on the FAC website on Tuesday in which he claimed that sources have revealed that the three judges will be upholding the guilty verdict.

He also claimed that the court is scheduled to deliver its judgment between July 8 and 15 and that Dzaiddin's judgment would be on the issue of conviction while Haidar's would be on the six-year jail sentence imposed on Anwar.

On April 14, 1999 High Court judge S Augustine Paul jailed Anwar for four counts of corrupt practice. The former deputy prime minister and finance minister is also serving another nine-year jail sentence for a sodomy offence.

Raja Petra said the information came from a reliable source which he cannot reveal.

"If I did not believe that the information was credible, I would not have published it in FAC which is an official website to campaign for Anwar's freedom. But for the first time, I do not want to be proven right," he said.

Fair trial

He also said comments from credible ex-judges like Salleh Abas (former Lord President) and Harun Hashim (former High Court judge) that Anwar's trial was irregular had strengthened public suspicion on the matter.

"The worst thing he (Dzaiddin) could do is to order a re-trial. Because what is important is not whether Anwar was innocent or not but whether he was given a fair trial. So from the judgments in the Zainur Zakaria appeal, it is obvious that Anwar was denied a fair trial," he said.

Asked if there could be a connection between Dzaiddin's decision and a possible extension of his service, scheduled to end on Sept 15, Raja Petra replied in the negative.

"I don't believe that he has been bought. Even if he gets the extension, he would only be around for a few months which makes no difference. If he should uphold the verdict, I believe that it will be due to political pressure," he said.

He said it is up to Dzaiddin whether he wants to be remembered as a credible judge or a person who succumbed to political pressure.

The judiciary has, in the past, faced severe criticisms from local bodies and politicians as well as international organisations over its lack of public confidence. This was a result of several controversial decisions in mainly high profile cases, including Anwar's trials for both corrupt practices and sodomy.

Judges had also indicated that they were instructed from their superiors on how to decide cases.

Cleaning up

Upon taking over the helm, Dzaiddin had promised that he would clean up the battered image of the judiciary.

The changes in the judiciary were first apparent in May last year when Shah Alam High Court judge Mohd Hishamuddin Mohd Yunus called upon the parliament to re-evaluate the use of the Internal Security Act which provided detention without trial and released two reformasi activists held under the ISA.

Then in June last year, justice Muhammad Kamil Awang in an election petition decision ruled against the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional candidate, saying that the candidate had committed election offences in the run in to the 1999 general elections.

Muhammad Kamil also said that he also received a telephone call from his superior on how to decide the case. Later the former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin admitted making the call, but denied giving any specific instructions on how to decide on the case.

Finally the Federal Court allowed lawyer Zainur's appeal against his contempt of court conviction and quashed his three month jail sentence imposed by High Court judge Augustine Paul during Anwar's abuse of power case in 1998.

Zainur was one of Anwar's lawyers and had filed an application seeking to removal of the two prosecutors claiming that they had "pressured" Anwar's tennis partner S Nallakaruppan, who was detained for illegal possession of firearms, to fabricate evidence sexual misconduct against Anwar in exchange for lenient punishment.

In the judgment the Federal Court justices censured Paul over his manner in handling the contempt proceedings.