Former Malaysian Bar president Ragunath Kesavan said today in the event of any investigation is conducted against the attorney-general as chief prosecutor, the solicitor-general, who is second in command in the Attorney-General's Chambers, can decide whether to prosecute or not.
If the decision to prosecute the AG is made, any deputy public prosecutor (DPP) is competent to handle the task, Ragunath said.
"Not necessarily it should be the solicitor-general prosecuting (the AG). It can be any DPP, but the directive must be from the solicitor-general.
“That is just how it is and it has to be that way.
“This is the general principle of the law (even though) you will not find any law that (explicitly) states so,” Ragunath told Malaysiakini.
Azailiza Mohd Ahad is the current solicitor-general.
Ragunath (photo) said even if the case was as simple as bringing an AG to court for traffic summons, it would result in a conflict of interest, requiring the solicitor-general to take over his position.
The senior criminal lawyer said this in response to former Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) director Mohamad Ramli Manan, who argued yesterday that attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali can be investigated under Section 212 of the Penal Code, which relates to the crime of harbouring an offender.
Alternatively, Mohamad Ramli said, investigations can also be carried out under Sections 217 or 218 of the Penal Code, related to a public servant disobeying a direction of law with the intent to save a person from punishment or property forfeiture.
This was in relation to Apandi’s recent decision to close cases based on the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission's (MACC) investigations into the RM42 million from SRC International and RM2.6 billion donation that was deposited into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s personal account.
Apandi had also allegedly refused MACC's request to conduct further investigations under the international Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) treaties.
Precedent set on conflict of interest
Lawyer Yusmadi Yusoff pointed out that there has been a precedent set on dealing with a possible conflict of interest during the time of Apandi’s predecessor, Abdul Gani Patail.
Yusmadi, a former Balik Pulau MP, said this was during PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim’s Sodomy II trial, during which he had objected to Gani’s involvement in the case.
“It was understood at that time that (then) prime minister Abdullah Badawi had responded to public outcry and announced that the AG (Gani) would not be involved in Anwar’s case,” Yusmadi said.
The matter was raised by Anwar’s lead lawyer, Sulaiman Abdullah, who had on Sept 10, 2008, objected to the application from the prosecution to transfer the case to the High Court.
Sulaiman argued that Gani (photo) was involved in a police report filed by Anwar, who accused the then AG and former inspector-general of police Musa Hassan of abuse of power in the first sodomy charge against him in 1998.
“Pak Lah had shown political will,” said Yusmadi in noting that there is no written law to compel the AG to step aside in an alleged conflict of interest situation.
It was also reported that Abdullah had, on July 19, 2008, announced that Gani and Musa would be excluded from involvement in the case after Anwar accused the two of fabricating evidence against him in the infamous "black eye" incident of 1998.
Commenting further, Yusmadi echoed concerns that Apandi’s role in clearing Najib has been shrouded with mysterious circumstances, starting with his own appointment as AG to replace Gani.
As such, he also urged the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate allegations against Apandi, after which, if any wrongdoing is found, to appoint a new AG to prosecute Apandi. -Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.