Najib's bid to recuse Sri Ram postponed over Apandi's affidavit
Najib Abdul Razak has filed an affidavit by former attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali to support his bid to oust Gopal Sri Ram from prosecuting in his 1MDB-linked court cases.
The filing has resulted in today's scheduled hearing of the former prime minister's civil jurisdiction recusal bid to be postponed to July 13...
Najib Abdul Razak has filed an affidavit by former attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali to support his bid to oust Gopal Sri Ram from prosecuting in his 1MDB-linked court cases.
The filing has resulted in today's scheduled hearing of the former prime minister's civil jurisdiction recusal bid to be postponed to July 13.
Najib's lead counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah revealed this to the media after case management of Najib’s judicial review to remove former federal court judge Sri Ram from prosecuting the cases.
On June 14, it was reported that Najib’s defence team also filed an application to disqualify Sri Ram from prosecuting the former prime minister’s 1MDB audit report tampering trial.
The disqualification bid, linked to Najib’s 1MDB audit report tampering case, was backed by Apandi’s affidavit.
In the affidavit, Apandi (photo) repeated similar allegation he had earlier uploaded to social media, that back in January 2018, Sri Ram had tried to coax him to play a role to arrest then prime minister Najib, on the alleged instruction of former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Today, the Kuala Lumpur High Court was initially scheduled to hear a separate civil jurisdiction legal bid by Najib to remove Sri Ram from prosecuting his 1MDB-linked cases such as the ongoing RM2.28 billion trial, and the audit report tampering trial.
Previously, the High Court dismissed Najib’s application for leave to commence judicial review to challenge Sri Ram’s appointment as DPP in the 1MDB-linked cases.
However, the Court of Appeal granted leave to Najib to proceed with the legal bid. This was further upheld by the Federal Court, which remitted the matter back down to the High Court.
At the High Court, Judge Mariana Yahya postponed today’s scheduled hearing to July 13 in order to allow the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) to prepare for the hearing, following the filing of Apandi’s affidavit in the matter.
When met after proceedings this afternoon, Shafee confirmed the outcome of the matter, adding that the court postponed today’s hearing to allow the respondents time to reply to the affidavit.
The respondents in Najib’s judicial review application are the government, the attorney-general (not named)/prosecution, and Sri Ram.
“We have as a result of Apandi revealing what Sri Ram (allegedly) did at his home, an affidavit filed by Apandi. We intend to use that affidavit in this case.
“We have given notice that we wish to use this affidavit in the case,” Shafee (below) said, adding that copies of the affidavit have been served on the respondents.
He said the postponement of the hearing is also to give time for Sri Ram to file an affidavit-in-reply on the allegations contained in Apandi’s affidavit.
The veteran lawyer added that the hearing on July 13 would be from 10am to late afternoon if need be due to the importance of the matter.
Shafee said this is because in the event the court allows Najib’s legal bid to recuse Sri Ram, all the 1MDB-linked cases would be nullified and may need to be restarted, among others.
When met after proceedings, senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan, who appeared for the three respondents, confirmed the postponement of today’s hearing as well as Najib’s filing of Apandi’s affidavit.
Shamsul also confirmed that it is the same affidavit that was filed by Najib’s defence team in the 1MDB audit report tampering trial.
Today’s postponement to July 13 also includes that of Shafee’s own separate judicial review to recuse Sri Ram from prosecuting the lawyer’s criminal case.
Previously in September 2018 at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court, Shafee was charged with two counts of money laundering involving RM9.5 million and two counts of making false statements. The case was later transferred to the Kuala Lumpur High Court.
Report this comment
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.