Muda seeks apex court determination in suit over MACC probe of judge

Muda is seeking for the Federal Court to determine whether the MACC has the authority to probe SRC trial judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali over an alleged violation of the Judges Code of Ethics 2009.

The youth-based political party on April 25 at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur filed the application to refer to the Federal Court a single constitutional issue linked to the party’s related lawsuit.

Back in April, Muda had filed an originating summons at the High Court to seek a declaration that MACC has no authority to investigate Nazlan (above) who heard ex-prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s RM42 million SRC International corruption case.

The party then filed the constitutional referral application, in order to get an apex court ruling that can expedite the resolution of the lawsuit pending at the High Court.

According to a copy of the constitutional referral application, the question that it seeks the apex court to rule over is ”Whether, having regard to Article 4 & Part IX of the Federal Constitution, the Judges’ Ethics Committee Act 2010, the Judges’ Ethics Code 2009 & the MACC Act 2009, does the MACC has the authority and/or jurisdiction to investigate and/or arrive at a finding or view that a serving High Court, Court of Appeal or Federal Court judge has breached the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009 and/or was in conflict of interest in presiding over a particular court case”.

The matter before the High Court in Kuala Lumpur is set for further case management on July 12.

Muda’s lawsuit targets the MACC and the federal government as the two defendants.

The first declaration that Muda seeks was 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.

The legal action was launched following media reports of 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 stated that MACC had concluded and/or had 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.

In an earlier media statement linked to the lawsuit, Muda’s counsel Lim Wei Jiet said the legal action was also in reference to MACC’s letter on Feb 20 to Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, which made the same conclusion and/or findings.

Senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly @ Arwi represented the federal government.

Explain Azam’s tenure extension, anti-graft activist urges PM

Bar passes ‘no confidence’ resolution against AG

Azam Baki's term as MACC chief extended for 1 year

'Islamic' to grant Najib royal pardon, Hadi's son-in-law says

Minister aides back on duty, Bersatu man wants MACC to explain

Lawyer: Dissenting SRC judgment does not taint majority decision

MACC overstepping jurisdiction by investigating judge Nazlan - C4

Muda seeks court declaration MACC has no power to probe SRC judge

Bersatu Youth lodges police report against MACC's 'info leaks'

Azalina's letter on Nazlan probe never discussed by cabinet - Loke

Handle judiciary 'breach of etiquette' internally: Ex-judges

Former M'sian Bar presidents lament 'assault' on judiciary