JUDGMENT

Abdul Malek Ahmad PCA:

Heightened by the release of the applicant by this court on sodomy charges some four days before we heard these applications, the intense speculation pertaining to the outcome of the four motions before us had certainly generated a certain amount of undue interest and unwanted publicity. This bad timing certainly would not have occurred if the first of the four motions filed on 9 August 2002, applying to set aside the convictions and sentences of the applicant on corruption charges, had been disposed of much earlier considering the lapse of twenty five months.

The first motion at encl. 80(a) filed on 9 August 2002 was for an order that the court invokes its inherent powers under r. 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 (hereinafter " the RFC " ) to set aside the convictions and sentences of the applicant that were confirmed and upheld by this court on 10 July 2002 or make such further or other orders it deemed fit and proper in the interests of justice.

The second motion at encl. 89(a) filed on 10 March 2003 was for an order that this court again invoke its inherent powers under r. 137 of the RFC to allow fresh/additional evidence affecting the