Former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim will know tomorrow if he can proceed with his application to the Federal Court to review its own decision in upholding his conviction for corrupt practice.

If the court decides it has the power to hear the application, then his lawyers will begin arguing that there are special circumstances for a review - something rarely done in Malaysia's legal system. They also plan to submit "new evidence".

However, if the court decides it has no such jurisdiction, then Anwar would have failed in his final attempt to clear his name, even though he completed the prison term for the offence on April 14.

The hearing was originally set for Aug 10 but was postponed after a family member of one of the judges died.

Court of Appeal president Abdul Malek Ahmad sat with Federal Court judges Siti Norma Yaakob and Allaudin Mohd Sherif.

Anwar was found guilty of corruption by the High Court in 1999, a decision which was upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.

He was freed on Thursday from a separate prosecution for sodomising his wife's driver, and is fighting now to clear his name completely.

'Seek pardon'

This morning, Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail raised a preliminary objection and argued that the court has no power to review its earlier decision.

He submitted that Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules - which allows the court to hear any application in order to prevent injustices - is ultra vires the Federal Constitution.

He pointed out that the rule is subsidiary to the Court of Judicature Act (CJA) which itself does not touch on giving the court jurisdiction to review or re-open an appeal.

"We humbly submit that subsidiary legislation must not inconsistent to the provisions of the parent act. Nowhere in the CJA makes provision for conferring of jurisdiction or power to review, re-hear or reopen an appeal which has been disposed of," said Abdul Gani

He also said that Anwar can apply to the Clemency Board for a pardon if he wants to clear his name.

Anwar's counsel, Karpal Singh ( left ), argued that the court had successively decided that it had inherent jurisdiction to hear a review in three other cases including the defamation case of senior journalist MGG Pillai.

He said even if the court agrees with AG's submission on Rule 137, the court still has inherent jurisdiction to hear the review as stated in the common law imported to the Civil Law Act 1956, which is a federal law.

"As to the submission that the applicant (Anwar) can seek remedy from the Clemency Board, we submit that it is entirely a different proceeding. The board cannot quash the conviction which we seek to do. Furthermore, that is not a legal proceeding and lawyers cannot be present to lay out the arguments," said Karpal.

Anwar's lead counsel Christopher Fernando urged the court to dismiss the preliminary objection saying that it is undisputed that the court has inherent jurisdiction to prevent any injustice or abuse of process.

"Why should this court whittle away at the power that it has, especially so in this case where fundamental principles of law have been clearly violated and abused? The court must not tie its hands and say that it can do nothing," he said.

Today's proceedings, as expected, did not attract a crowd as Anwar is away in Munich, Germany, for treatment of a slipped disc. However, his eldest daughter Nurul Izzah and his brothers Rosli and Idrus were present with several close relatives.

"Papa is very concerned about the outcome of this application. I hope to tell him what happened in court once I visit him. I hope to fly there on Thursday," said Nurul Izzah outside the court.

If Anwar succeeds in the review, he will not have to wait for another five years to resume his political career.