Anwar's 'RM9.5m paid to Shafee' claim - hearing fixed for Sept 14

PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim's appeal against the government that his Sodomy II trial was not fair due to a payment of RM9.5 million to senior lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah by then prime minister Najib Abdul Razak has been fixed for Sept 14 by the Court of Appeal.

This follows case management on the matter today before the deputy registrar of the appellate court, Haslina Basarudin, the lawyer for Anwar, J Leela, said.

Her firm has taken over the case files from the firm of Daim and Gamany and the case had initially been fixed for hearing today. Senior federal counsel Mazlifah Ayob appeared for the government.

The High Court in Kuala Lumpur on Nov 8 last year struck out Anwar Ibrahim's originating summons to set aside his Sodomy II conviction based on Sarawak Report's allegation that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak paid lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah RM9.5 million and that there was no fair trial in the case.

This decision was made in chambers by Justice Azizah Nawawi, who also ordered the former opposition leader to pay RM10,000 in costs to the government.

In dismissing the application, Justice Azizah said although Anwar, as an accused person was entitled to a fair trial, but in his complaint he claimed the prosecutor (Shafee, photo), who was conducting the appeals before the Court of Appeal and Federal Court, was paid RM9.5 million by the prime minister.

“The crucial issue here is that Anwar is making a bare allegation on the payment. He made reference to two payments on Sept 11, 2013, and Feb 17, 2014. But there is nothing to support this allegation in his affidavit.

“In his affidavit, Anwar simply says the information is in the public domain,” she noted, adding that Anwar also filed a discovery application to inspect documents and for Najib and Shafee to produce statements of accounts, in particular, the entries for the two dates.

Justice Azzizah said under Order 41 Rule 5(1) of the Rules of Court 2012, an affidavit might contain only such facts the deponent (applicant) is able of his own knowledge to prove and under Rule 5(2), an affidavit used in an interlocutory proceeding might contain information of belief, with the sources and grounds thereof.

However, the judge noted that Anwar's supporting affidavit did not comply with Order 41 Rule 5(1).

"The plaintiff has not deposed the basis of his allegation of the RM9.5 million payment and has not given any supporting documents to support his bare allegation.

"The foundation of the originating summons is the alleged payment by Najib to the prosecutor and this is not supported at all. Therefore, on this issue alone, I find the plaintiff's application is not supported by any evidence and the application is groundless and must be dismissed," Justice Azizah said.

"At the same time, as Anwar applied to challenge Shafee's appointment before the Federal Court vide an application for review under Rule 137 (of the Federal Court rules) and the same was dismissed by the Federal Court, this similar application is an abuse of the court process," she said.

Anwar filed the originating summons and named the government as the defendant to set aside his Sodomy II conviction in light of a posting in Sarawak Report that Najib paid RM9.5 million to Shafee, claiming the act violated his right with regard to Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution on the liberty of a person to have a fair trial.

He also filed the discovery application to have Najib and Shafee produce their bank accounts to show the purported payment made on those dates. - Mkini