Court denies Rosmah's appeal to challenge solar graft case

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Rosmah Mansor’s appeal for leave to commence a legal challenge to nullify a graft case against her linked to the RM1.25 billion solar hybrid energy project.

A three-person bench chaired by Hanipah Farikullah unanimously denied leave for the wife of incarcerated former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak to proceed with her judicial review that challenges the validity of the appointment of the solar case’s lead prosecutor, the late Gopal Sri Ram.

Today was set for the bench - which includes Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali and See Mee Chun - to deliver its decision on Rosmah’s appeal against the decision of the High Court (civil jurisdiction) of Kuala Lumpur on Aug 30 last year.

On Sept 1 last year, the High Court (criminal jurisdiction) in Kuala Lumpur convicted her in the graft case and sentenced her to 10 years of imprisonment and RM970 million fine.

However, she obtained a stay of execution against the sentencing, and her separate criminal appeal against this guilty verdict is set for hearing before the Court of Appeal on July 11 (the hearing was initially set in June before that date was vacated).

The Court of Appeal bench also ordered Rosmah to pay RM10,000 in costs to the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the government, the two respondents in the appeal.

Filed out of time

During the online proceedings this morning, See read out the decision on behalf of the bench, ruling that Rosmah’s judicial review was filed out of time at the High Court.

“There is no merit in this appeal,” See said.

Under the law, a judicial review must be filed within three months of the applicant finding out about the impugned authority’s decision (which he or she seeks to challenge in court).

Rosmah’s legal team includes lawyers Akberdin Abdul Kader and Jagjit Singh, among others.

Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan and Liew Horng Bin appeared for the AGC and government.

Rosmah was not present during today’s civil court proceedings.

On Aug 30 last year, High Court judge Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid denied judicial review leave to Rosmah due to him allowing the AGC and the government’s preliminary objection.

The objection was that the judicial review was filed out of time, as Rosmah was first charged at the criminal court on Nov 15, 2018, but she only filed the civil action on June 24 last year.

The respondents had cited Order 53 Rule 3 (6) of the Rules of Court 2012, which states that a judicial review leave application shall be made promptly within three months from the date when the grounds for such a bid arises, or when the decision was first communicated to the applicant.

The judge agreed with the respondents’ prior submissions that there was a delay of three years and three months in Rosmah’s filing of the legal action.

Kamal also disagreed with Rosmah’s lawyers’ arguments that the grounds for the judicial review arose on May 27, 2022.

On that date, the apex court dismissed her appeal to quash her solar graft case.

Rosmah had mounted numerous legal bids to challenge the appointment of the late Sri Ram, who passed away in January.

Her judicial review is distinct from the criminal case against her, and she is still out on bail pending her upcoming appeal before the Court of Appeal to quash her conviction and sentencing.

Rosmah gets temporary passport release again to go S’pore

'Sad' Rosmah says touched by 'justice for Najib' calls

Rosmah: I did not seek jewellery, firm sent me items for ‘publicity’

COMMENT | Hollow demands from Najib’s family for his freedom