The Court of Appeal today reserved its judgment o­n whether to allow the appeal by jailed former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim to set aside his conviction for sodomy and nine-year jail sentence.

Justices Pajan Singh Gill, Hashim Mohd Yusof and Richard Malanjum said they would deliver their decision o­n another date, which is yet to be fixed.

"We reserve our judgment as we need time to deliberate o­n all arguments forwarded by each counsel,"justice Pajan told the counsel who completed their submissions this afternoon.

Anwar is appealing against High Court Judge Arifin Jaka's decision o­n Aug 8, 2000 to sentence him to nine years jail for sodomising Azizan Abu Bakar, the former driver of Anwar's wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.

The ex-deputy premier's co-accused Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja is also appealing against his conviction. Sukma, an Indonesian national, was sentenced to six years' jail and four strokes of the rotan for the same charge.

'End the misery'

At the conclusion of his submissions, lead counsel Christopher Fernando urged the court "to do what is right", stating that the defence arguments had proved that Arifin's decision should be set aside.

"Our arguments are sound and strong. Put an end to the misery of o­ne of Malaysia's most illustrious sons," he said.

"This court's decision will remain until the end of time. Do the right thing and your lordship would be remembered in glory by the future generation."

Earlier, Fernando reminded the court of inherent dangers, should Arifin's judgment and ruling be upheld, especially o­n issues of complainant's corroboration.

"None of us are safe if this conviction is upheld. It would be very easy for an innocent person to be convicted of sexual offences. Today it is Anwar, tomorrow who knows? It might be (Attorney-General) Datuk Gani (Patail) himself," said Fernando whose statement tickled those in the public gallery.

At this point, the AG urged the court to caution Fernando against making unnecessary comments.

"I'm not saying that it will happen to him (the AG). I am just putting an example that none of us would be safe from such a dangerous precedent," said Fernando when Justice Pajan told him to confine himself to legal issues.

Bare statement

Continuing the attack against the prosecution's star witness, Fernando said the prosecution was making a bare statement when they described Azizan's evidence as strong and truthful.

He said Azizan had been inconsistent about many facts relating to the alleged offence, including the time and place, from Anwar's first trial (on corruption) to the second trial o­n sodomy.

He said the judge made many misdirections in law when he refused to accept the evidence of defence witnesses, but had no problems in accepting Azizan's uncorroborated testimony.

"Not an iota of challenge was made by the prosecution against our witnesses. Yet none of this was considered by the judge," he said.

Peculiar manner

Free Anwar Campaign director Raja Petra Raja Kamaruddin told malaysiakini later that Anwar was of the opinion "that they had won the case from day o­ne".

Raja Petra, who met the jailed politician briefly after the court adjourned, said Anwar felt that the court could have allowed the appeal based o­n any of the many legal arguments forwarded by his lawyers.

"He said his lawyers had raise many cogent points including o­n constitutional issues which strongly support his appeal. However, looking at the political interference, there may not be a favorable decision," added Raja Petra.

Meanwhile, Wan Azizah said her husband felt that the manner in which his bail application was handled was "peculiar" as the panel of judges has yet to make any decision.

"He was told that judges usually take a short time to deliberate o­n bail application but in his case, lawyers made their submissions yesterday and they still need more time to decide," she said.

Yesterday the court reserved its judgment o­n whether to allow Anwar's application for bail. The prosecution has objected to this.

On the main appeal, the Keadilan president said that while Anwar was hopeful, he has always been realistic.

"We've been through such things before. We know the possibility of political interference and we have our suspicions about the judiciary's independence," she said.

For nine days since March 24, the panel of judges heard lengthy submissions by lawyers Fernando, Karpal Singh and Gobind Singh Deo who represented Anwar and Sukma.