The High Court here Tuesday ruled that it cannot strike out the sodomy charge against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim based solely on medical reports that there was no penetration.
Justice Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah said medical reports could not serve as the basis for the court to use its inherent powers to strike out the charge.
It had first to hear the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, he said when dismissing Anwar's application to strike out the charge.
Anwar is charged with sodomising his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari, 24, at a condominium in Bukit Damansara on June 27 last year.
Mohamad Zabidin said that at this stage, the court agreed with Solicitor-General II Datuk Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden's submission that the reports were confined to observation and physical examination and were not conclusive.
He said that according to Mohamed Yusof, the prosecution's case would rely more on oral, forensic and other evidence.
The important element in this case was for the prosecution to prove that there was penetration by the accused's penis in the complainant's anus, he said.
He said the medical reports were one of the evidence that could be used either by the prosecution or the defence to cast doubt on the evidence of penetration or non-penetration.
Mohamad Zabidin said the second issue that the court took into consideration was Anwar's claim that the charge against him was malicious and an abuse of the court process.
He said Anwar's submission in his affidavit that the link between Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and the "black-eye" incident in 1998 and the prosecution team in this case could cause bias was unacceptable.
"The onus to prove malice on the part of the prosecution in bringing this latest charge lies on the applicant.
"The applicant's affidavit named Gani in what he claimed to be an attempt to concoct evidence against him in 1998.
"Even if that were so, there is nothing to show that the same thing has happened in the latest case," he said.
Mohamad Zabidin said that merely showing that the prosecution team in this case had knowledge of Gani's role in the 1998 incident was not enough for the court to hold that they were biased in this case.
The judge fixed a month starting Jan 25 next year for trial although Anwar's counsel, Karpal Singh, objected on the ground that his client was appealing the decision in the Court of Appeal.
Karpal Singh later told reporters that a notice of appeal would be filed at the Court of Appeal tomorrow.
Anwar was present in court.
Justice Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah said medical reports could not serve as the basis for the court to use its inherent powers to strike out the charge.
It had first to hear the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, he said when dismissing Anwar's application to strike out the charge.
Anwar is charged with sodomising his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari, 24, at a condominium in Bukit Damansara on June 27 last year.
Mohamad Zabidin said that at this stage, the court agreed with Solicitor-General II Datuk Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden's submission that the reports were confined to observation and physical examination and were not conclusive.
He said that according to Mohamed Yusof, the prosecution's case would rely more on oral, forensic and other evidence.
The important element in this case was for the prosecution to prove that there was penetration by the accused's penis in the complainant's anus, he said.
He said the medical reports were one of the evidence that could be used either by the prosecution or the defence to cast doubt on the evidence of penetration or non-penetration.
Mohamad Zabidin said the second issue that the court took into consideration was Anwar's claim that the charge against him was malicious and an abuse of the court process.
He said Anwar's submission in his affidavit that the link between Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and the "black-eye" incident in 1998 and the prosecution team in this case could cause bias was unacceptable.
"The onus to prove malice on the part of the prosecution in bringing this latest charge lies on the applicant.
"The applicant's affidavit named Gani in what he claimed to be an attempt to concoct evidence against him in 1998.
"Even if that were so, there is nothing to show that the same thing has happened in the latest case," he said.
Mohamad Zabidin said that merely showing that the prosecution team in this case had knowledge of Gani's role in the 1998 incident was not enough for the court to hold that they were biased in this case.
The judge fixed a month starting Jan 25 next year for trial although Anwar's counsel, Karpal Singh, objected on the ground that his client was appealing the decision in the Court of Appeal.
Karpal Singh later told reporters that a notice of appeal would be filed at the Court of Appeal tomorrow.
Anwar was present in court.