Anwar Ibrahim has urged the prosecution handling Perwaja Steel ex-managing director Eric Chia's misappropriation trial should subpoena him and former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad so that "the public and the trial court get the whole truth".

According to Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice-president R Sivarasa, Anwar was of the view that the recent news reports on Chia's criminal proceeding last week which spoke of his decision to issue a waiver to the former Perwaja Steel boss had misled the public from the truth.

"Anwar Ibrahim was of the view that the reports were slanted and one-sided to depict as if he, as the then finance minister, had permitted the misappropriation in Perwaja by issuing a waiver to contracts above RM15 million," said Sivarasa in a statement today.

"To ensure that the public and the trial court hearing the Eric Chia case get the whole truth, Anwar urged the public prosecutor (who is also the attorney-general) to issue a subpoena against him and Mahathir to testify in the trial."

Last week, in the misappropriation trial, prosecution witness Perwaja Steel chairperson Zainal Abidin Sulong testified that Anwar had issued a waiver to Chia on purchases and contracts below RM5 million whereby the latter need not get the approval from Finance Ministry.

Free hand to Chia

The witness also testified that Chia had claimed that he is only answerable to Mahathir who had given him a free hand on how to manage the steel company.

Malay dailies Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian in their reports entitled ' Anwar Beri Pengecualian Khas kepada Perwaja ' and ' Anwar Beri Pengecualian: Saksi ' respectively, had chose to highlight the testimony linked to Anwar.

In the case, Chia has been accused of making an unauthorised payment of RM76.4 million to Japanese firm NKK Corporation on Feb 22, 1994 via the account of Frilsham Enterprises Incorporated.

He also faces an alternative charge of illegally entering into an agreement with NKK to dispose the RM76.4 million without the approval of Perwaja's board of directors.

He is charged under section 409 of the Penal Code which carries the maximum penalty of 20 years jail.

Meanwhile, leading prosecutor Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden in the Eric Chia trial told malaysiakini that to date the prosecution did not intend to call either Anwar or Mahathir.

"For now we have no intention to call the former ministers to testify in the trial. However, we will make a final decision after we complete our re-examination of the current witness (Perwaja chairperson Zainal Abidin Sulong)," said Mohd Yusof.

He also urged the public not to be distracted from the real issues of the trial.

"The main issues that the court need to consider are only these: whether the technical assistance rendered by NKK to Perwaja were given free of charge and; whether the technical assistance agreement given to NKK was given with authority from the company's board of directors. That's all."

Mahathir overseeing project

In his statement, Sivarasa also said that Anwar had noted that the two Malay dailies had entirely abandoned Zainal's testimony on Chia admission that he (Chia) reported straight to Mahathir.

He said they have also left out the evidence which stated that Mahathir was the person overseeing the Perwaja Steel project.

"He (Anwar) states that the report was done in bad faith because public record showed that he initiated investigations into Perwaja after discovering the company's massive financial loss amounting to RM2.98 billion as at end of 1995," said Sivarasa.

"He had then tabled an early report by Pricewaterhouse in parliament in December 1996. The report said that in prima facie , Eric Chia was responsible. The full report issued in 1998 had named Mahathir as the person who made approvals without complying to several financial procedures in approving."

In 1999 while in jail Anwar had lodged a police report regarding the full report but until today, the authorities have yet to record his statement on the matter.

He stressed Anwar will not hesitate to refer to his panel of lawyers if it is found that the media reports were misleading or written in an unprofessional manner.