PUTRAJAYA, Feb 10 — Over 1,000 supporters of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim have gathered outside the Palace of Justice here to cheer the opposition leader on ahead of a Federal Court decision that could determine his and the country’s political future.

The five-man bench headed by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria arrived at 10am to deliver their decision on the PKR de facto leader’s case that is being watched internationally.

Arifin read out the summary of the case and revisited the details of the allegation, including accuser Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s testimony of how Anwar allegedly propositioned him for sex.

He also said both the High Court and Court of Appeal had considered Saiful to be a credible witness, despite efforts by Anwar’s lawyers to contest the reliability of his claim.

Saiful had remained consistent throughout repeated cross-examinations and this led the appellate court to consider his testimony acceptable.

Arifin said the Federal Court concurred with both subordinate courts on Saiful’s credibility.

The Chief Justice added that Section 377B of the Penal Code was only concerned with acts of carnal intercourse against the order of nature, which includes sodomy and oral sex, and that consent was not a necessary ingredient in the offence.

Supporters of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim rally outside the Federal Court in Putrajaya, February 10, 2015. ― Picture by Mayuri Mei Lin

According to Arifin, the High Court had acquitted Anwar on the basis that the DNA evidence recovered from Saiful was not admissible. The Court of Appeal overturned the decision, however, as it did not find that Anwar’s expert witnesses had successfully debunked the evidence.

He then spoke of the dangers of convicting an individual without corroborated evidence, but pointed out that the Evidence Act 1950 did not require corroboration for cases of sexual offence.

The Chief Justice, citing previous cases, added that evidence obtained illegally may be admitted as long as it is relevant to the trial, in reference to the defence teams challenge against the chain of custody for items used to obtain DNA samples from Anwar.

The Federal Court, as such, accepts the DNA evidence adduced by the prosecution.

Arifin also said the DNA evidence retrieved from samples taken from items allegedly used by Anwar during his detention could only have come from him.

One of Anwar’s daughters began sobbing as Arifin continued rejecting the points raised by the defence, in apparent indication of how the case is expected to be decided,

Continuing, Arifin said the Federal Court and the lower courts rejected Anwar’s claim of a political conspiracy in the sodomy charge, as the opposition leader did not deny being present during the time of the alleged act.

“We hold no merit in in the appellant’s unsubstantiated claims of political conspiracy,” he said.

A large banner was hoisted in the middle of the square as Anwar supporters chanted “Reformasi (Reformation)” and “Bebas Anwar (Free Anwar)”.  

The group marched down to the courthouse at about 8.30am carrying PKR flags and banners that read “Rakyat Hakim Negara (The people are country’s judges)”.

Some supporters arrived by the busloads from outside Kuala Lumpur.

Later in the morning, a rival group of about 50 or so Anwar detractors — most with their faces covered — gathered opposite his supporters chanting “Tangkap Anwar (Arrest Anwar)” while brandishing banners calling for sodomites to be punished.

Heavy police presence had outnumbered supporters earlier this morning, but the situation has since been reversed.

The courtroom was packed with Pakatan Rakyat leaders, Anwar’s family and supporters as well as local and international media that are keenly watching today’s Federal Court decision on Anwar’s final avenue of appeal.

Anwar earlier put on a brave front even as the possibility of prison loomed large.

“I’ve gone through this a lot (before). I pray for the best,” Anwar told reporters.

“Que sera sera (whatever will be will be),” he added, smiling.

The High Court had in 2012 acquitted Anwar of the 2008 sodomy charge but the appellate court ruled on March 7 last year that the trial judge had erred when rejecting the DNA evidence produced in the case.

More to come