Ex-Umno leader Lokman gets 1 month jail for contempt in Najib’s 1MDB case
Former Umno leader Lokman Noor Adam has been ruled to have committed contempt of court related to former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s RM2.28 billion 1MDB corruption case.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court sentenced him to one month in jail effective today, following its ruling in favour of the prosecution’s committal application.
Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah ruled that Lokman (above) committed contempt in relation to...
Former Umno leader Lokman Noor Adam has been ruled to have committed contempt of court related to former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s RM2.28 billion 1MDB corruption case.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court sentenced him to one month in jail effective today, following its ruling in favour of the prosecution’s committal application.
Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah ruled that Lokman (above) committed contempt in relation to the eighth prosecution witness (PW8) in the 1MDB case, namely Najib’s former special officer Amhari Effendi Nazaruddin.
“I find the act of the respondent, accompanied with intent, to make the media statement and police report, amounted to a threat against PW8 and other potential witnesses in the trial, giving rise to risk on the due administration of justice and amounted to contempt of court,” Sequerah ruled.
However, the judge allowed a stay of execution on the custodial sentence, pending an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Today was scheduled for decision on the committal application.
The prosecution sought to cite Lokman, a former Umno supreme council member, for contempt over the threatening of witnesses in Najib’s RM2.28 billion corruption trial.
The committal application is over two alleged 2019 incidents involving Amhari.
Amhari had testified for the prosecution in the ongoing RM2.28 billion 1MDB corruption trial against Najib.
The first incident was on Sept 25, 2019, where Lokman (above) uttered words in a video interview, amounting to an express or implied threat against Amhari, for testifying against the former prime minister.
The second incident also occurred on the same day, in relation to Lokman lodging a police report against Amhari, in relation to the oral evidence given by him at the 1MDB trial.
During the previous hearing of the contempt application before Sequerah, DPP Gopal Sri Ram submitted that right of freedom of speech does not justify Lokman’s action.
The DPP contended that, among others, the words contained in the police report and the video interview amounted to an attack not only on Amhari but on the court itself in relation to Najib’s 1MDB case.
However, Lokman’s counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah had countered that the contempt application ought to be dismissed, as the show-cause notice to the former Umno leader allegedly did not state critical details of the purported contemptuous acts.
Shafee contended, among others, that the prosecution cannot rely on the affidavit in support of details on the alleged contemptuous acts, claiming that the pertinent details should already be contained in the show-cause notice itself.
'Lokman’s statement may intimidate future witnesses'
During proceedings, Sequerah ruled that Lokman’s statement not only by inference threatened and intimidated Amhari, but also may have a similar effect on any future witness in the 1MDB case.
“There is the risk of impeding in the administration of justice by potentially deterring future witnesses from giving evidence in the criminal trial.
The judge noted that this risk of interference in the administration of justice is not allayed just because Amhari never lodged a police report over Lokman’s action.
“The fact that the respondent (Lokman) was a political personality and published the police report (via the media statement) on (proclaimed) public interest does not exonerate him.
“Viewed in the proper context, the statement was calculated to threaten PW8 from giving testimony,” Sequerah said.
The judge pointed out that there is the inference of mala fide (bad faith) in Lokman’s statement as it was made to threaten Amhari and not merely to seek the authorities to investigate what was said by the witness while testifying in court.
After the contempt ruling, Shafee pleaded for the court to allow a stay of execution on the custodial sentence pending appeal.
This attracted an objection by DPP Mohamad Mustaffa P Kunyalam, who submitted that Lokman's legal team has failed to show any special or exceptional circumstances to justify such a stay.
The DPP however added that in the event that the court allows a stay, then the prosecution seeks for the court to impose a RM5,000 bond with one surety.
Sequerah then allowed the stay of execution of the jail sentence, ordering Lokman to post a RM3,000 bond with one surety.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.