Ex-AG chides Najib over ‘political’ motive in suit over 1MDB cases

 

The 1MDB-related charges against him were part of a long-planned, premeditated exercise, says Najib Razak. (AP pic)

KUALA LUMPUR: Former attorney-general Tommy Thomas said Najib Razak’s lawsuit against him and the government over alleged misfeasance in public office on 1MDB-related charges was filed for “political reasons”.

In his affidavit of support to strike out Najib’s “malicious prosecution” suit, Thomas said it was “for use in the campaign leading up to the recent Melaka state elections and the next general election”.

Thomas stated that Najib had never raised any allegation of “malicious prosecution” as part of the defence in his SRC International case and the ongoing 1MDB cases.

“The four criminal cases against Najib are still pending in the High Court and Najib remains as an accused person,” he said.

Last month, Najib had filed the suit against Thomas and the government, claiming that the 1MDB-related charges against him were “part of a long-planned, premeditated exercise”.

He is seeking RM1.94 million in damages.

He alleged that Thomas, who was attorney-general from June 4, 2018 to Feb 28, 2020, carried out his duties “in line with the plans” of the then Pakatan Harapan (PH) government.

Thomas was appointed after PH won the 14th general election (GE14) and formed the government, with Dr Mahathir Mohamad assuming the post of prime minister for a second time.

The government — which is named as co-defendant — and Thomas seek to strike out Najib’s suit on the grounds that it is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process.

In the suit, Najib also claimed that Thomas had prejudged his cases before making a decision to charge him as well as interfered in the investigations.

Thomas contended he never owed any duty to Najib “to not speak about his cases”.

“I deny having made any sub judice statements in respect of Najib’s ongoing trial. Neither could the statements I made prior to the charges being brought against him amount to sub judice.

“He is prematurely and collaterally attacking a future decision of the judges presiding over the four remaining criminal cases — they have not even determined his guilt.

“Accordingly, no cause of action arises here and he could not have suffered any losses. His claim here is also vague and without particulars,” he added.

Thomas also argued that Najib did not plead in this suit that the four cases had been “compromised” because of his remarks.

“Najib’s trials are heard by professional and capable judges who will determine the cases alone.

“Any relief available to Najib for such remarks would be a gag order or contempt proceedings – not a civil claim for damages.

“No such proceedings were ever brought by Najib against me at the material time,” he said.

The High Court set Jan 19, 2022 as the next mention date. - FMT