Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's review application to remove a paragraph in a Federal Court judgment in the first sodomy case which stated that he had homosexual tendencies, has been adjourned to Dec 2.

Anwar's counsel Datuk Sulaiman Abdullah and senior federal counsel Manoj Kurup had approached the Federal Court deputy registrar Khainur Aleeza Ismail before the proceeding began.

When the case was about to be called up before a five-member Federal Court panel which was chaired by Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, the judge (Justice Zulkefli) indicated that the matter had been adjourned to Dec 2.

The other judges presiding on the panel were Federal Court judges Datin Paduka Zaleha Zahari, Datuk Zainun Ali, Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali and Datuk Ramly Ali.

Senior federal counsel Manoj Kurup said Anwar took objection to Justice Mohamed Apandi Ali sitting on the panel, adding that if the matter had gone on today, he (Manoj) would object to the application to recuse the judge.

Meanwhile, Sulaiman said the matter had been taken out but he declined to disclose the reason for the adjournment as he said the matter was done in chambers.

Anwar, 64, had filed the review application in May this year, nine years after he was acquitted and discharged by the Federal Court of allegedly sodomising his family driver Azizan Abu Bakar.

Anwar was freed by the Federal Court on Sept 2, 2004, in a 2-1 majority decision, on a charge of allegedly sodomising Azizan.

The Federal Court had overturned a High Court's decision to sentence Anwar to nine years' imprisonment.

The same Federal Court panel had also overturned the conviction and six years' jail sentence on Anwar's adopted brother, Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja, who was jointly tried with Anwar for allegedly sodomising Azizan in Tivoli Villa in Kuala Lumpur in 1994.

The then Federal Court judge Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad, who later became Chief Justice, wrote the majority judgment.

In the majority judgment, he (Abdul Hamid) had said, "we find evidence to confirm that the appellants (Anwar and Sukma Darmawan ) were involved in homosexual activities and we are more inclined to believe that the alleged incident at Tivoli Villa did happen."