The former opposition leader’s counsel Latheefa Koya said government lawyer Tengku Intan Soraya Tengku Ismail informed them about this move during case management before High Court deputy registrar Erry Shariman Nor Aripin today.
“The court has instructed them to file the application before the next case management on May 18,” she told reporters.
Latheefa , however, said the government had yet to file its defence in response to Anwar’s suit initiated on April 17.
Anwar said the Court of Appeal and Federal Court had convicted him of the sexual misconduct charge based on perjured evidence of crown witness Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
Anwar’s other lawyer, N Surendran, said the legal team would rely on section 44 of the Evidence Act to revoke the conviction and sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal and later affirmed by the apex court.
Section 44 states that any party to a suit or proceeding can produce evidence if an incompetent court made a ruling, or a judgment was obtained by fraud or collusion.
Anwar, 69 also wants the court to set him free if the suit is allowed.
In the statement of claim, Anwar said the government (public prosecutor) knew and had knowledge that Saiful was an untruthful witness.
“Saiful gave perjured evidence, which to the knowledge of the defendant (government), was false. Yet the defendant relied on and perpetuated the perjury to its advantage,” he said.
He said the government fabricated false evidence in the form of an alleged DNA sample and used it to support the perjured evidence of Saiful.
Anwar is currently serving a five-year jail sentence at the Sungai Buloh Prison for sexual misconduct on Saiful in 2008.
He was initially acquitted by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Jan 9, 2012.
However, the Court of Appeal reversed the acquittal and sentenced him to five years’ jail on March 7, 2014.
On Feb 10, 2015, a five-man bench of the Federal Court, chaired by the then chief justice Arifin Zakaria, maintained the conviction, saying it found that Saiful was a credible witness.
The bench also concluded that there was no break in the chain of evidence, as claimed by Anwar’s lawyers.