KUALA LUMPUR: Solicitor-General II Datuk Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden today reminded Judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah not to be perturbed by criticism arising from the ongoing sodomy trial of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.  He urged the judge to not recuse himself.

During submissions today, the lead prosecutor told Mohamad Zabidin that people would invariably express criticism against a judge's decision, regardless of which side the ruling favoured.

But for a judge to bear potential criticism in mind when making a decision was tantamount to "not doing your duty [as a judge]", Mohd Yusof added.

"Your lordship has ruled against the prosecution in [Anwar's bid for additional] evidence but we didn't say you are biased, so just rule out [the recusal] proceedings," Mohd Yusof said, referring to Mohamad Zabidin's decision on July 15 last year to grant Anwar access to additional documents and evidence.

The Federal Court on Jan 29 had overruled Mohamad Zabidin's decision, ruling that Anwar was not entitled the documents and evidence the latter had demanded from prosecutors.

Mohamad Zabidin today heard lengthy submissions from Mohd Yusof and Anwar's lead counsel Karpal Singh after Anwar filed an application seeking Mohamad Zabidin's recusal.

Anwar, in his affidavit, contends that there could be "a fear of a real danger of bias" on the part of Mohamad Zabidin after the latter refused to caution Utusan Malaysia or cite the paper for contempt.

In earlier arguments for Mohamad Zabidin to stop hearing the trial, Karpal accused the judge of "not stating the truth" and, by extension, "lying" when Mohamad Zabidin declined to cite Utusan Malaysia during proceedings last week.

"In this application, what's fundamental is this, and I say this without mincing my words, whether your lordship is indeed guilty of not stating what is the truth. What's not true can also be described as false and a lie," Karpal said.

Referring to precedents, Karpal added that a judge who did not speak the truth would have lost his right to sit on the bench and preside over the trial.

Karpal was challenging Mohamad Zabidin's finding that the bed placed in the master bedroom of the apartment unit where the alleged sodomy took place was mentioned in open court.

"This means your lordship did not tell the truth and this means your lordship lied. If so your lordship cannot be unbiased and impartial. Your lordship ought to step down," Karpal said, disagreeing that Saiful had mentioned the bed in open court.

Karpal also said it was of "fundamental importance" that justice must be "manifestly, expressly and undoubtedly be seen to be done".

"There's no point in blaming the foreign press for critcising our legal system if judges cannot live up to what's expected of them in trial...

"The judiciary must redeem itself. Your lordship ought to redeem yourself. A judge must not lie, he must not say what is not the truth," Karpal said, maintaining that the recusal application was not a "personal affront" against Mohamad Zabidin.

Karpal reminded Mohamad Zabidin he was bound by the Judges' Code of Ethics and could be referred to a disciplinary committee if found to be acting partially.

The veteran lawyer also took a swipe of judges, remarking that previous judges were "giants in their own right unlike present judges".

In submissions, Karpal also argued that a judge should recuse himself based on the test of a "reasonable apprehension of bias".

In reply to Karpal's arguments, Mohd Yusof submitted that the test should be a test of "real danger of bias" rather than a probability of bias.

According to Mohd Yusof, a real danger of bias could be found in a situation where a judge had "a personal friendship or animosity" with any person involved in a case or if a judge had expressed "extreme or unbalanced" views during the course of a hearing.

"The presumption of judge's impartiality has to be challenged on serious grounds... The burden of proof is on the applicant, strong proof must be showed," Mohd Yusof said.

Mohd Yusof added that Anwar's grouses against Utusan Malaysia was not an issue that had bearing on the sodomy charge or the trial's final outcome.

"Judges are trained to confine themselves to evidence produced in court rather than what the newspaper decides to report. The matter complained about is something extraneous, petty [remeh] and is something that shouldn't be complained about," Mohd Yusof added.

Mohd Yusof also ticked off Karpal for using "strong language" when the latter contended that Mohamad Zabidin had "lied".

"So, to say that his lordship lied is very strong words. You can argue a client's case without fear or favour but to use strong language is unacceptable. We can be firm but we have to be polite. I'm not even asking the court to cite Karpal for contempt but use proper language," Mohd Yusof said.

After hearing submissions, Mohamad Zabidin said "obviously I cannot make my decision today" before summoning counsels into his chambers to fix a date to deliver his decision.

Mohamad Zabidin then reappeared shortly after and announced Feb 18 to deliver his decision.