The prosecution has argued that allowing former premier Najib Abdul Razak’s lawyers wider access to documents for seven SRC International Sdn Bhd charges will hamper the prosecution’s case and affect the way criminal proceedings are conducted in the country.
This was contended by lawyer V Sithambaram (above), who is part of the prosecution team, on behalf of the government before the Putrajaya Court of Appeal today.
Yesterday, Najib’s lawyers argued that it was in the interest of “fair play” that the court allows the defence to be supplied with all admissible evidence before the trial started so that they could prepare a relevant defence statement.
In response, Sithambaram stated that there was no provision in the relevant laws which required the prosecution to do so.
These laws included the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), MACC Act 2009, and the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Amla).
Plus, such an order would prejudice the prosecution and alter how criminal cases are tried, he said.
“Granting this order would mean severe consequences to the prosecution.
“It would mean that all the investigation papers, all the documents and statements, all the MACC and Amla documents (would have to be given).
“If they succeed, this will change the landscape of all MACC and Amla cases [...] this has far-reaching consequences and will open the floodgates for how prosecutions are conducted in this country,” Sithambaram told a three-member panel comprising Justices Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Lau Bee Lan and Rhodzariah Bujang.
He said the prosecution had already handed over “31 volumes” of documents amounting to more than 6,000 pages to the defence, as required by the CPC.
Sithambaram added that he was worried how disclosing all documents including witness statements to Najib would put the prosecution’s witnesses at risk.
“In future cases, nobody will come forward,” he predicted.
‘If prosecution goes haywire, so be it’
Representing Najib today was Harvinderjit Singh, who denied that seeking more documents from the prosecution would endanger its witnesses.
He cited how laws like the Witness Protection Act 2009 and the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 offered protection to concerned witnesses.
While Harvinderjit acknowledged the order would potentially “inconvenience” the prosecution, he argued that not disclosing the documents to the defence ran a more significant risk of prejudicing the accused person.
“It is better to protect the accused person, who is presumed to be innocent, than to even consider the added obligation to the prosecution.
“And this is not even going to prejudice them, it is just inconveniencing them,” he said.
“If the prosecution is going to go haywire, and if, as my learned friend says, there is going to be a tremendous change in the law, so be it!” Harvinder exclaimed.
The appeal was one of Najib’s four interlocutory applications. The others concern a gag order on the media; the removal of Sulaiman Abdullah as the lead prosecutor; and the manner in which the case was transferred from the Sessions Court to the High Court.
The hearings were scheduled to conclude today but the court allowed them to continue on Friday after Najib’s lead counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah applied to be excused due to a hand injury.
Najib was previously slapped with seven charges for criminal breach of trust, abuse of power and money laundering involving RM42 million from SRC, a government-owned firm which was a former 1MDB subsidiary.
He has also claimed trial separately to three money laundering charges in relation to SRC for receiving illegal proceeds amounting to RM47 million. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.