The outcome of ex-deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim's attempt to absolve himself of his corruption conviction will be known on Sept 15 when the Federal Court decides whether to uphold or reverse the conviction or order a fresh appeal hearing to be held.

The court set the date this afternoon after hearing closing submissions from both the defence and prosecution teams who had presented their arguments over the past two days.

"We need time to consider the arguments put before us and we will give our judgment next Wednesday ," said Court of Appeal president Abdul Malek Ahmad, who sat with Federal Court judges Siti Norma Yaakob and Alauddin 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 later the Federal Court itself.

Anwar successfully applied for the Federal Court to review its own decision on Monday based, among others, on new evidence relating to the prosecution's alleged mala fide (intentionally bad) attempts to procure fabricated evidence against him.

The judgement after a judicial review hearing is rare in Malaysia's legal system and is Anwar's final chance to clear his name. He has already served out the six-year prison sentence for the corruption conviction as of April 14, 2003.

Anwar was freed last Thursday after the Federal Court quashed his sodomy conviction. The politician is now fighting to clear his name completely.

'Evidence fabricated'

In his submissions, lead counsel Christopher Fernando urged the court to invoke its inherent power to review the corruption conviction as Anwar was denied a fair hearing at the High Court where evidence (in favour of Anwar) was suppressed.

"As an apex court, this court is not bound to previous precedent. It can break new ground when gross injustice has occurred, as in this case, which calls for immediate and effective intervention to set things right," said Fernando.

He said there was 'compelling evidence' that the two prosecutors at the High Court stage - current attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail and Azahar Mohamad (since appointed a judicial commissioner) - were caught red-handed in attempting to procure fabricated evidence against Anwar.

"The significance of the matter is that if he (Gani) can attempt to make a fabrication in front of another senior lawyer, it's a matter of speculation what would have been done to other witnesses in the absence of lawyers."

Fernando said the two prosecutors should have been disqualified as their conduct had contaminated the entire proceedings.

"When we tried to adduce this evidence and requested for the two prosecutors to be disqualified, the trial judge (S Augustine Paul) acted in a bias manner and reprimanded the defence team instead, and thus suppressed the evidence," he said.

"That being the case, the entire proceedings beginning from the High Court right up to the Federal Court, is vitiated," he argued, adding that this fact was enough for the court to set aside the conviction and adduce fresh evidence.

He explained the new evidence was in addition to other evidence they had procured in the midst of the High Court trial, referring to senior lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillion claim that he was asked by Gani and Azahar to get his client S. Nallakarupan (Anwar's tennis partner) to give false evidence on the former's sexual conduct.

"The evidence is a complaint letter written by Manjeet to former chief justice Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah against the trial judge," revealed Fernando.

Lawyers clash

Senior deputy public prosecutor Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden however said that the evidence Fernando sought to adduce was not new.

"It relates to the allegations against the two prosecutors which was an issue that has already been dealt with at the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. The applicant wants this court to re-open an issue which had been submitted upon, argued and rejected at all three levels of the court," he said.

Abdul Gani submitted that if the court was to allow the review, it would mean allowing Anwar a fourth tier of appeal.

"It is submitted that the application before this court persuades this court to re-open, re-litigate and review the case against Anwar Ibrahim. This is an abuse of process of court and therefore should be rejected," he said.

Today's hearing at Putrajaya's Palace of Justice started on a curious note when Fernando requested the court to reinstate the defence motion to adduce fresh evidence (Manjeet's letter) which he claimed was withdrawn without authorisation by his co-counsel Karpal Singh.

"There was a slight miscommunication that led co-counsel Karpal Singh to apply for the withdrawal of the motion . I pray for it to be reinstated," said Fernando.

Justice Malek then sought Karpal's clarification as he had earlier applied to drop the motion.

"I made the application based on my view that it's inappropriate to adduce fresh evidence at the review stage. But if they want to go ahead with the motion, I can't stop them," Karpal told the court.

Fernando quickly stood up and said: "We are counsel acting on the instructions of our client and I am the lead counsel. There was no intention to drop the motion and neither was there an instruction to that effect. It was done without the client's permission."

Karpal replied that the miscommunication had resulted due to Fernando's late arrival in court yesterday morning. "Maybe as the lead counsel should have come earlier. They cannot come as they wish," he said.

'Not parliament'

The remark drew expressions of dissatisfaction from Anwar's two other lawyers, which in turn prompted Karpal to warn them to be quiet.

Justice Malek intervened at this juncture and said: "Please, this is not a parliament. Address the court one by one."

The veteran judge was obviously referring to Karpal, who is DAP member of parliament for Penang's Bukit Gelugor.

The issue was then resolved with court allowing the reinstatement of the motion.

The defence lawyer were also seen to have seemingly made their peace when Karpal assisted Fernando in his closing submissions.