Queen’s Counsel only proposed 4 years after Najib’s SRC case - prosecution

A Queen’s Counsel (QC) from the United Kingdom did not act for Najib Abdul Razak when the former prime minister’s RM42 million SRC International corruption case was brought to court in 2018, the Kuala Lumpur High Court heard.

Deputy public prosecutor V Sithambaram submitted this during today’s hearing of an application to allow Jonathan Laidlaw to be temporarily admitted to the Malaysian Bar so the QC could represent Najib in the upcoming SRC appeal before the Federal Court.

The DPP submitted that the QC’s assistance is not needed when compared to Najib’s legal team led by defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah (above, left), who argued for the former premier when the trial was at the High Court and all the way through the initial appeal before the Court of Appeal.

In objecting against the QC bid, Sithambaram cited a Federal Court ruling in an appeal linked to a 2006 failed attempt to temporarily allow UK lawyer Cherie Booth, who is the wife of former UK premier Tony Blair, to represent a party in a Malaysian court case.

“The appellant (Booth) was not present during the trial in the High Court and in the Court of Appeal. Thus the question is to what extent the appellant would effectively be able to assist the Federal Court?

“Surely, a foreign counsel like the appellant, lacking in local knowledge and not having handled the trial and appeal, would necessarily be disadvantaged in handling the appeals in the Federal Court,” Sithambaram quoted the ruling.

The Federal Court has set 10 days in August to hear Najib’s final appeal to quash his conviction as well as a sentence of 12 years in jail and RM210 million fine for one count of abuse of power, three counts of criminal breach of trust (CBT), and three counts of money laundering linked to RM42 million from SRC.

On Dec 8 last year, the Court of Appeal dismissed Najib’s appeal to overturn the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s decision to find him guilty and impose the sentences.

Najib was first charged over the SRC case before the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court in mid-2018. However, the matter was later transferred to the High Court for a full trial, with its verdict delivered in July 2020.

Opening floodgates to similar applications

As part of Najib’s bid for Laidlaw to represent him, Shafee previously said that the UK counsel could help “evolve and mature” Malaysian jurisprudence.

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

During open-court proceedings before High Court judge Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid today, Sithambaram submitted that Laidlaw’s legal expertise would not assist Najib as Malaysia practises a different legal system compared to the UK.

The prosecutor pointed out that Malaysia subscribes to constitutional supremacy, where laws can only be made in conformity with a written Federal Constitution, while the UK practises parliamentary supremacy - where laws are made squarely by Parliament as there is no written supreme law there.

Sithambaram pointed out that Malaysia has since undergone extensive developments in its legal system since Merdeka in 1957, and over 21,000 local lawyers come to the courts daily in relation to cases involving abuse of power, CBT and money laundering.

“It is only a matter of research. It does not mean each time we need to run to the UK. After being independent for over 60 years, it is not rocket science but a matter of interpretation (of Malaysian law),” he said.

Sithambaram said that the application should not be allowed since if the QC is permitted to represent Najib, Laidlaw would still need to fly to Malaysia, read the case files, and only then can the QC make arguments.

He added that this would open the floodgates to similar applications in other court cases.

Others also object

Meanwhile, the respective counsel for the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), the Malaysian Bar, and the Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee also adopted similar submissions in objecting against the QC application.

In previously filed affidavits, the Bar and KL Bar Committee have also objected to the QC bid.

Towards the end of proceedings, Kamal fixed July 21 to deliver his decision on whether to allow Laidlaw to be temporarily admitted to the Bar so that the QC can represent Najib.

Previously a subsidiary of 1MDB, SRC later became fully owned by the Minister of Finance Incorporated.

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

Bar: Shafee more qualified than Queen's Counsel to represent Najib

SRC appeal: Queen's Counsel can 'evolve' M'sian law - Shafee

COMMENT | Why the QC should not defend Najib

LETTER | Chief Justice, the Queen's Counsel must be rejected