The Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeals by three parties to seek leave (permission) to quash attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali's decision not to initiate action against Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak in relation to 1MDB.

The appeals were by the Malaysian Bar, former law minister Zaid Ibrahim and former Umno division leader Khairuddin Abu Hassan.

The unanimous decision by the three-member bench was made after more than five hours of “revealing” submission before an open court unlike the High Court proceedings which was done in chambers.

Towards the end of the submission, Ambiga Sreenevasan, who was representing the Malaysian Bar, made an impassionate plea to the judiciary that the 1MDB case is a financial scandal of international proportions.

“We are the only country where - 1MDB originates - no action has been taken in relation to this outrageous financial scandal. This is not only about the scandal but also our criminal justice system.

"We must be careful not to close the door on the investigation as our whole system is being scrutinised.

“We cannot do less than other jurisdictions to uphold the principle that no one is above the law and hence the need to uphold the rule of law and for our leaders to constantly act transparently,” she said.

Justice Umi Kalthum Abd Majid said the three appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.

"The decision made by the High Court judge is affirmed," she said without providing grounds for the decision.

The other two judges were Justice Idrus Harun and Justice Abdul Rahman Sebli.

It was reported that Apandi had absolved Najib of any wrongdoing with regard to 1MDB on Jan 26, 2016.

This led to the three appellants to file their applications for judicial review to challenge the decision made by the attorney-general.

Apandi, a former Federal Court judge, replaced Abdul Gani Patail who was then heading the task force on 1MDB, and its subsidiary company SRC International Sdn Bhd.

High Court judge Hanipah Farikullah dismissed their applications on Nov 11.

Ambiga appeared with senior lawyer Tommy Thomas for the Bar, while former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram appeared for Zaid, and lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla appeared for Khairuddin.

Purported charges against Najib

Ambiga and Tommy also highlighted the various actions taken by other countries like Singapore, Switzerland, United States and Luxembourg over 1MDB.

Tommy argued that Najib was even named in the US Department of Justice court papers filed last July regarding the forfeiture action that is currently undergoing.

At one point Tommy, the lead counsel for the Bar, wanted to highlight various reports pertaining to 1MDB but he was stopped from doing so by Justice Umi Kalthum, citing that this was the leave stage and it was not necessary to reveal the articles.

The Bar was questioning Apandi's move in his decision made on Jan 26 last year in asking the Malaysian-Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) to close its investigations into the case.

Meanwhile, Sri Ram said there was a purported charge against Najib for corruption and criminal breach of trust prepared by the Attorney-General's Chambers, which led to former MACC advisor Rashpal Singh and another person to be remanded.

The senior lawyer said the charge document was produced during the remand proceedings in an open court before a magistrate.

“A charge had been framed against Najib for criminal breach of trust and corruption and two people were produced before a magistrate for disclosing the charge. There was no incredible denial of that and this was within public knowledge.

“Having the charges framed meant there was already a decision to prosecute. There was no affidavit in response to this. For this requires further investigation. It is not inherently improbable that a charge had been framed against the PM for corruption and breach of trust,” Sri Ram said, and reminded the bench that for leave application, there was a low threshold which his client had fulfilled.

He said this episode showed that Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution, regarding discretion, had not properly been exercised.

At one point, Sri Ram wanted to read a portion of Zaid's affidavit but was stopped by Justice Umi Kalthum. Sri Ram then replied that he is entitled to read it according to the law.

Haniff meanwhile, in his submission, said that the remedy lies with the court when it comes to questioning the discretion of the attorney-general.

Senior federal counsel Amarjeet Singh maintained that the attorney-general's decision was not justiciable and hence the review cannot be granted.

“This exercise of discretion is non-justiciable. They are taking the issue because the PM was not charged,” he said.

Newly appointed Malaysian Bar president George Varghese, who was present with his predecessor Steven Thiru, said they will consider taking up the matter to the Federal Court.

“Naturally we are disappointed. We will be seeking legal advice from our solicitors whether to file for leave. We have 30 days to do so," he said.

Sri Ram said he is confident of getting his client's instruction to take the matter further.

While Haniff said they will be making an application for leave to appeal in two weeks.