Apex court cleared SRC judge, Muda's suit academic: Azam

Muda’s lawsuit against the MACC should be considered academic as the Federal Court cleared SRC International trial judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali of any breach of the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009.

In his affidavit in response to the political party’s originating summons regarding the validity of the MACC probe into Nazlan, MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki pointed out that the Federal Court chaired by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat last year cleared Nazlan of any conflict of interest when hearing the RM42 million SRC International corruption case against former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak.

Via a filing at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on June 23, the anti-graft watchdog chief noted that the issue was also settled by the apex court in this year’s legal action over the MACC’s probe into the judge.

Azam (above) was referring to the apex court’s decision on Feb 24 over a separate legal action regarding the MACC’s probe of Nazlan, where Tengku Maimun ruled that the anti-graft investigation was not done in good faith as it was done without consulting her beforehand.

The MACC chief commissioner was also referring to the 2022 apex court decision that dismissed Najib’s appeal to quash his SRC International conviction as well as 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine. This bench was also chaired by Tengku Maimun.

Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali

Azam pointed out that the MACC probe was done prior to the above two apex court rulings that ultimately found Nazlan did not breach any judicial ethical regulations.

“I have been advised by the senior federal counsel that this action filed by the plaintiff (Muda) has been rendered academic and no longer relevant on these reasons,” the anti-graft watchdog chief contended.

Azam pointed out that MACC prepared a report for Tengku Maimun to peruse through the results of the agency’s investigation, with the chief justice having written a letter to the agency on Feb 22 this year to indicate it had taken note of the MACC’s letter to her.

Azam contended that the MACC’s views on the issue contained in the letter have been rendered irrelevant due to the apex court rulings that exonerated Nazlan.

“I have also been advised by the senior federal counsel that Prime Minister (Anwar Ibrahim) had, during a question-and-answer session in Dewan Negara (on June 19), informed the house about the status of the MACC’s investigation on Nazlan.”

Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat

Among others, the prime minister informed that MACC and the Attorney-General’s Chambers found that Nazlan had not committed any criminal act and the issue of conflict of interest does not arise because the Federal Court made a ruling on this during Najib’s case, Azam said, adding that Muda’s lawsuit should be dismissed with costs.

The MACC chief commissioner further contended that the issuance of the letter to Tengku Maimun had not infringed on the law and freedom of the judiciary as well as had not violated the doctrine of separation of power between the judiciary, the executive and legislative branch of government.

Azam explained this is because the MACC letter was only issued to the chief justice and no media statement was made over this, pointing out that the leak of the letter on social media was perpetrated with neither authorisation nor knowledge of the anti-graft watchdog.

The agency claimed that its initial investigation against Nazlan was done under Section 16 of the MACC Act 2009 and not under the Judge's Code of Ethics, and that the letter to Tengku Maimun merely aired its views on the issue of alleged violation of the Judge's Code of Ethics.

Azman further contended that Muda has no locus standi (legal standing) to file the lawsuit against MACC, as Section 9(c) of the Societies Act 1966 forbids a political party from instituting legal action under its own name.

On April 12 before the High Court in Kuala Lumpur, Muda filed the originating summons that sought a court declaration that MACC has no authority to investigate the judge who heard Najib’s RM42 million SRC International corruption case.

Muda’s suit

The civil action targeted MACC and the federal government as the two defendants.

The first declaration that Muda seeks is that the MACC has no authority and/or jurisdiction to investigate and/or arrive at a finding or view that serving judges of the High Court, Court of Appeal, and the Federal Court have breached the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009 and/or was in a conflict of interest in presiding over a particular court case.

The second declaration sought is the MACC finding and/or view - that Nazlan had been in breach of the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009 and/or had a conflict of interest in presiding over Najib’s SRC International graft case - is unlawful and/or unconstitutional.

In a media statement to announce the legal action, Muda’s counsel Lim Wei Jiet said the lawsuit was filed due to Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said’s letter to Najib’s lawyers on March 20.

The letter allegedly stated that MACC concluded and/or made a finding that Nazlan - now a Court of Appeal judge - had breached the Judges’ Code of Ethics and had a conflict of interest when presiding over the SRC International case.

Lim said the suit is also in reference to MACC’s letter on Feb 20 to Tengku Maimun, which allegedly made the same conclusion and/or findings. - Mkini