Shafee's comments not directed at judge, court hears

Veteran lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah’s alleged contemptuous statement related to his client Najib Abdul Razak’s criminal case merely touched on the conduct of the prosecution and not of the trial judge, the Kuala Lumpur High Court heard today.

Shafee’s counsel David Mathews submitted before judge Mohd Firuz Jaffril that the basis of the Attorney-General Tommy Thomas’ complaint about the statement did not jeopardise the integrity of the judiciary as it was directed instead at the way the prosecution conducted former premier Najib’s case.

“If the full context was presented to my lord, one would appreciate that the substance of the complaint was about the conduct of the prosecution.

“The court must appreciate the full context (of Shafee’s statement), not just partial.

“If we look at the statement or words, there is no suggestion that the judge (Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali) was not being straight (upright and in good faith).

“He (Shafee) was expressing his opinion on their (Najib’s defence) chances (in winning the case), on the prosecution withdrawing the charge (against Najib), among others.

“He was (expressing his) thoughts on his chances being good, that is all. They (defence lawyers) are also stakeholders in the upholding of justice,” Mathews said this afternoon.

Same jurisdiction

The contempt application was over the media statement that Shafee made while outside Nazlan’s court on Feb 7.

Mathews also argued that the attorney-general failed to explain why the contempt application against Shafee was filed in Firuz’ court despite the alleged contemptuous statement by Shafee being uttered outside Nazlan’s court.

“Even though the March 1 order (by Firuz for the attorney-general to commence with contempt proceedings against Shafee) was obtained in (Firuz’) chambers, they (attorney-general) have not answered why they did not file in Justice Nazlan's court.

“They submitted that all courts in Malaysia have the same jurisdiction... can file (contempt application) anywhere.

“It is not an issue of jurisdiction but appropriateness. It is about the proper avenue to file the (contempt) application,” Mathews said.

At the end of the proceedings today, Firuz told both parties that the court needed time to consider their submissions, and fixed July 24 to deliver the decision on Shafee’s application to set aside the leave granted for the attorney-general to proceed with contempt proceedings against Shafee.

On March 1, Firuz had granted the leave to proceed with the contempt proceedings against Shafee over comments that the lawyer made in a KiniTV video titled ‘Shafee: This is completely bonkers'.

The comments were part of Shafee's Feb 7 media statement outside Nazlan's court in regard to his client Najib's ongoing case.

Najib is undergoing trial in Nazlan's court for alleged abuse of power, graft and money laundering involving over RM42 million from a former 1MDB subsidiary, SRC International. - Mkini