PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim today filed an originating summons in his latest bid to set aside his conviction for Sodomy II following the allegation that appointed senior lawyer cum prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah received RM9.5 million from Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

Anwar named the government as the sole respondent in the application.

He is seeking a declaration that his conviction for sodomy under Section 377B of the Penal Code by the Court of Appeal on March 14, 2014, as null and void, and ultra vires of Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution regarding liberty of a person.

He is also seeking a declaration that the Federal Court decision on Feb 10, 2015, as null and void for similar reasons.

The application was filed at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur by the law firm Daim and Gamany.

“He should not remain in prison for even one more day. That is the reason why we filed a certificate of urgency,” said Anwar's lawyer N Surendran, who is also Padang Serai MP.

Anwar's daughter Nurul Nuha maintained that the allegations about Shafee demonstrated that her father was innocent and that his right to a fair trial had been violated due to Najib's purported interference.

In his supporting affidavit to the application, the former deputy prime minister stated that following his acquittal by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Jan 9, 2012, the prosecution had appointed Shafee to lead an appeal against the decision.

“Shafee was employed by the Public Prosecutor to pursue the appeal against me. This is contrary to the ordinary practice of the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the office of the Public Prosecutor. Normally, the ordinary practice is to place the prosecution of a criminal case at the trial and appellate levels in the hands of the Deputy Public Prosecutor from the chambers.

Anwar claimed that the handling of the prosecution’s case by Shafee had exacerbated the situation. “Hence, I made applications to remove Shafee from conducting the appeals but was not successful. I did not possess the relevant information (on the RM9.5 million) payment then, as it has only surfaced in the public domain now,” he said.

In the affidavit, Anwar observed that Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nancy Shukri had informed Parliament that Shafee was paid a mere RM1,000 to conduct the prosecution against him in both courts at the appellate level.

“This is not the entire truth. The truth is that Shafee was paid a total of RM9.5 million in two tranches, the first RM4.3 million on Sept 11, 2013, the second RM5.2 million on Feb 17, 2014. This was about 18 days before the Court of Appeal heard the prosecution's appeal, reversed the trial judge's decision and convicted me on March 7, 2014.

“Both payments were made by Najib, the PM and a servant of the defendant (the Malaysian government). I only discovered the facts about these payments a few days ago...In any event, neither Najib nor Shafee have denied or contradicted the truth of the aforesaid facts.”

Fair trial denied

Anwar also added that as an accused person, he was constitutionally entitled to a fair trial at all stages of the judicial process.

This, he stated in the affidavit, included being prosecuted by a counsel who was independent and uninfluenced by third parties through financial inducement.

“This guaranteed right has been violated in my case. This is because Shafee had a financial interest in the matter. Further, Najib has regarded me as his political opponent,” claimed Anwar, adding that it had been part of his defence during the trial and appeal that the prosecution against him was a pre-arranged plan to which Najib was a party.

He had previously said that his prosecution was a form of political persecution.

Anwar declared that the allegation about Shafee receiving RM9.5 million from Najib indicated his “total lack of independence”, which dated back to his appointment to the case.

“Shafee pursued the hearings at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court in my case with the greatest zeal. He lacked the professional independence that a DPP from the Attorney-General’s Chambers would have exhibited,” he stated in the affidavit, adding that after the affirmation of his conviction and sentence by the apex court, Shafee had gone on a roadshow to condemn him and reveal in-camera evidence.

Anwar alleged that although Shafee's conduct constituted criminal contempt, the government had not seen fit to bring any criminal proceedings against Shafee.

He also said that Shafee was present at Najib's house when the complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan had gone there.

Anwar concluded in the affidavit that he had been deprived of a fair trial due to Shafee’s alleged employment as a prosecutor who had “substantial financial interest”, stating that “in all the circumstances of this case, there has been a violation of Article 5(1) of the constitution.”

Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty, save in accordance with law.

It was previously reported that whistleblower website Sarawak Report revealed the payments made by Najib. Malaysiakini is unable to independently verify these claims and has contacted Shafee, and Najib's press secretary Tengku Sharifuddin Tengku Ahmad on the matter.

Besides this latest application, Anwar had earlier filed another application on April 17, to set aside the conviction and sentence on the grounds that the government relied on fabricated evidence in the form of a DNA sample.