"Executive influence" was present in the sodomy trial of former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, lawyer Karpal Singh (photo) told the Court of Appeal today.

When submitting that the prosecution ought not to have even commenced the sodomy case against Anwar, Karpal said that it was the executive influence which led the prosecution to act as it did in prosecuting Anwar.

"I don't believe that the former Attorney-General Mohtar Abdullah (who led the prosecution of Anwar) believed in what he did. No properly trained legal officer would have done what he did. The executive influence propelled this prosecution.

"Unfortunately the AG is the legal adviser to the government. He is not independent. It is the executive influence which resulted in these charges (against Anwar)," submitted Karpal.

Anwar (photo) is appealing against the High Court decision o­n Aug 8, 2000 which sentenced him to nine years jail for sodomising Azizan Abu Bakar, the former driver of Anwar's wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.

Anwar's co-accused, Indonesian Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja, who was found guilty and sentenced to six years jail and four strokes of the rotan, is also appealing.

The hearing is before justices Pajan Singh Gill, Hashim Mohd Yusof and Richard Malanjum. Anwar's defence team ended their submissions this morning which allowed Sukma's lawyer to begin their submissions.

Wrong to disallow application

In his submission, Karpal also said that High Court judge Arifin Jaka (photo), who handed out the sentence to Anwar, was wrong in not allowing the defence application to recall the prosecution's star witness to question his conviction for a khalwat ('close proximity') offence at the Syariah Court.

He said the defence was deprived of the opportunity to challenge Azizan's credibility as he had admitted from the witness stand that he was religious and of high morals.

"To say that it was unnecessary to recall Azizan was defiant in the face of the law," he said.

Karpal continued that Arifin's conduct is questionable as the judge went to great length to justify the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses, in particular Azizan.

"This court must be put o­n guard as the trial judge tried to reconcile the irreconcilable. He tried to find ways and means to justify his reasoning. You could put a label of a thoroughbred o­n a horse, but if it is a donkey, it's still a donkey," said Karpal.

He said the fundamental breach of law committed by the judge must be corrected, stating that the o­nly remedy would be to allow Anwar's appeal and set aside his conviction.

Star witness to star dust

Karpal said the prosecution's case is weak as it was saddled o­n the evidence of its star witness Azizan.

"If carefully dissected, the evidence of the star witness would turn to star dust," he said.

Meanwhile, Sukma's lawyer Jagdeep Singh Deo submitted that the judge was wrong in holding his client's confession to the misdeed as admissible.

He said Arifin failed to consider the fact that the confession was given while Sukma was still in remand where he was subjected to "high-handed interrogation".

He also said the judge misdirected himself when he ordered Sukma to take the stand at the trial-within-a-trial held to determine the admissibility of the confession.

"The order was in complete disregard of the tried principle of criminal trials that a person (accused) has the right to remain silent. It is also a complete disrespect to Sukma's substantive rights," he said.

He claimed that Arifin had imposed "too high a standard" to the defence when it was the prosecution who needed to prove the admissibility of the confession beyond reasonable doubt.

"He refused to believe Sukma's statement and the defence witnesses, and instead took in everything the prosecution had to offer as the truth. He had prejudged the issue from the start," he said.

No consideration for evidence

To this statement Justice Malanjum asked: "Why would the judge called for Sukma's statement if he had prejudged the issue?"

Jagdeep replied that Arifin was very keen to hear Sukma's explanation but refused to put any consideration in the evidence.

Anwar seemed composed and calm in court today despite having to wear a neck brace for his slip-disc condition. He was seen talking to PRM president Dr Syed Husin Ali who attended the hearing in the morning.

The jailed politician appeared excited to see his two youngest daughters Nurul Iman, 12, and Nurul Hana, 10, who came during the afternoon session. As soon as the proceeding ended, the girls quickly ran to their father who hugged them immediately.

His wife Wan Azizah, who is also Keadilan president, said the two girls seldom get to visit their father in court due to their school activities.

The hearing continues tomorrow.