1MDB - Anina's suit against Najib struck out

The Federal Court today struck out an appeal by former Langkawi Umno Wanita member Anina Saadudin who sued caretaker prime minister Najib Abdul Razak for misfeasance in public office.

A three-member bench dismissed the appeal after allowing an application from lawyer Irzan Iswat from the firm of Messrs Haniff Khatri to discharge himself from representing Anina.

The court also allowed the application to strike out the appeal. The other two judges were Justice Balia Yusof Wahi and Justice Aziah Ali.

Anina, along with Dr Mahathir Mohamad and former Batu Kawan Umno division leader Khairuddin Abu Hassan, had filed a misfeasance in public office suit against Najib in relation to 1MDB.

The apex court had on last Feb 27, dismissed Mahathir and Khairuddin's leave to appeal after the High Court ruled that Najib is not a public officer.

Haniff then wanted to apply a postponement of the proceedings after he said that he had not received any instructions from Anina. The lawyer also wanted Justice Raus to recuse himself from hearing the matter as Mahathir had challenged the judge's appointment as chief justice.

However, Justice Raus ordered the hearing for leave to proceed after which the appeal by Mahathir and Khiruddin was dismissed.

On Aug 30 last year, the Court of Appeal had upheld the High Court's decision to strike out the suit by the three after agreeing with the High Court decision.

“We agree with the learned judge’s (of the High Court) decision. There is no merit in the appeal. We affirm the decision of the High Court,” said Justice Idrus Harun who led a three-member bench with Justice Vernon Ong and Justice Abdul Rahman Sebli.

Earlier, on April 28 last year, High Court judge Justice Abu Bakar Jais ruled that Najib was not a public officer.

Justice Abu Bakar pointed to Section 3 of the Interpretations Act which he said needed to be proven to show Najib was a public officer and that he was in a position in public office.

The section defines public office as an office in any of the public services and public officer as “a person lawfully holding, acting in or exercising the functions of a public service”.

Article 132(1) of the Federal Constitution, the judge said, defined what public services are.

He said Article 132(1) stated that public services comprise the armed forces, the judicial and legal service, the general public service of the federation, the police force, the education service, the joint public services and public services of each state.

"This provision (in the constitution) shows Najib is not a member of any of the services listed under this provision of the Federal Constitution," the High Court judge ruled. - Mkini