`


THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!


Monday, June 13, 2022

SRC appeal: Queen’s Counsel doesn’t even know BM - prosecution

 


The Queen’s Counsel (QC) from the United Kingdom that Najib Abdul Razak seeks to represent him in the RM42 million SRC International appeal does not even know Bahasa Malaysia, the prosecution contended.

In an affidavit to oppose the former prime minister’s bid to bring in the QC to act for him, deputy public prosecutor Mohd Ashrof Adrin Kamarul pointed out that Jonathan Laidlaw (above) does not fulfil this basic requirement under Section 11(2) of the Legal Profession Act 1976.

The prosecutor noted that there was no need for Najib to seek the expertise of a QC as there are local advocates and solicitors who regularly appeared and argued in court on cases of abuse of power, criminal breach of trust (CBT) and money laundering.

In Najib’s ongoing appeal before the Federal Court, the former finance minister is seeking to quash his conviction as well as a 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine over one count of abuse of power, three counts of CBT and three counts of money laundering linked to RM42 million of funds from SRC International.

Formerly a subsidiary of Malaysian sovereign wealth fund 1MDB, SRC later became fully owned by the Minister of Finance Incorporated (MOF Inc).

Ashrof pointed out that it was not shown how local lawyers, who have appeared numerous times in similar criminal cases from the magistrates’ courts all the way to the apex court, lack the ability and special qualifications or experience to represent Najib.

The prosecutor contended that Laidlaw has not shown how he had any special qualification and experience in relation to Malaysian law and process linked to the SRC charges, over the ones possessed by local lawyers.

DPP Mohd Ashrof Adrin Kamarul

“The applicant (Laidlaw) does not have the Bahasa Malaysia qualification as required under Subsection 11(2) of Act 166 (LPA) to succeed in the ad hoc application under Section 18 of the same act.

“The applicant is not a qualified person for admission as an ad hoc advocate and solicitor under Act 166.

“The fact that Muhammad Shafee Abdullah conducted the appellant’s (Najib) trial and appeals at the Court of Appeal is a clear testimony that Shafee has the special qualification and experience to conduct the appeals relating to the said charges at the Federal Court. Hence the application is without merit,” Ashrof argued.

Matter involves novel points

The application to admit Laidlaw as an ad hoc lawyer for Najib is set for case management before the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Thursday this week.

Previously for Najib’s bid for Laidlaw to represent him, Shafee contended that a UK QC can help “evolve and mature” Malaysian jurisprudence.

In an affidavit of support, Shafee said this is because the matter involves “several novel points which had never been decided by Malaysian courts”.

Defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah

Shafee cited several of these purported novel issues, among them on whether Najib - as then premier, finance minister, or adviser emeritus of SRC - could be said to be entrusted with dominion over funds of SRC as its “agent”.

On May 31, Najib’s legal team filed the originating motion for Laidlaw to be allowed to represent the former prime minister.

The apex court has set 10 days in August to hear Najib’s final appeal to quash his conviction and sentence in the SRC graft case.

On Dec 8 last year, the Court of Appeal dismissed Najib’s appeal to overturn the lower court’s decision.

On July 28, 2020, the High Court found him guilty on the seven charges.

The lower court had also imposed the sentences but stayed its execution pending disposal of Najib’s appeal.

Besides being a former prime minister and finance minister, Najib also used to be SRC’s adviser emeritus and chairperson of 1MDB’s board of advisers. - Mkini

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.