PUTRAJAYA: From day one of Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s SRC International Sdn Bhd appeal, there has been a series of twists, turns and last-minute decisions.
The last day did not disappoint in terms of drama either, continuing right to the very end when his conviction and sentence were reaffirmed by the Federal Court.
Yesterday’s proceedings kicked off with Najib’s counsel Hisyam Teh Poh Teik informing the court of a last-minute application to recuse Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat from presiding over the appeal.
Najib was seeking for the Chief Justice to recuse herself from hearing or deciding on the appeal and for a new panel to preside over the appeal, citing the danger of “bias”.
He pointed to a Facebook post by her husband, Datuk Zamani Ibrahim, on May 11, 2018, which spoke about the former prime minister being “dethroned” after the 14th General Election.
Describing it as “highly disturbing” that Zamani had negative sentiments about his premiership, he said Zamani would have influenced the thinking of his spouse.
It was during this motion that Najib’s former counsel, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, made a cameo when he came into court to help Hisyam with the submission.
As soon as he arrived, Muhammad Shafee addressed the court, describing his relationship with Najib’s recently discharged solicitors, Zaid Ibrahim Suflan TH Liew & Partners (ZIST), as “acrimonious” but adding that his relationship with Hisyam, however, was “good”.
Shafee also requested an adjournment, saying he was unprepared for the motion.
“I have no materials before me,” he said.
However, the request was turned down by the court. Shafee was then seen speaking to Najib briefly before leaving the courtroom.
In his reply, lead prosecutor Datuk V. Sithambaram said the recusal application was in bad faith and that “this was what criminal lawyers do best”, insinuating that the defence was attempting to delay proceedings.
Just as Hisyam was replying to Sithambaram’s rebuttal, the counsel invited another lawyer, Datuk Firoz Hussein Ahmad Jamaluddin, to supplement his submission.
As Firoz Hussein, who had earlier sat in the public gallery, walked into the bar area, Sithambaram stood up to object.
“This is a court of law. This is not a circus where people walk in and out to take part,” he said.
Firoz Hussein told the court that he would take instructions from Najib during the lunch break but this was denied. The panel ended up dismissing the recusal application.
Just before the panel delivered its decision on Najib’s main appeal, the former prime minister stood up to deliver a prepared written statement from the dock.
He claimed that he had been framed and that he was not accorded a fair hearing.
Najib also drew the court’s attention to a leaked grounds of judgment that had been carried by the Malaysia Today blog.
“The court needs to provide answers – not just to my family and me, but to the country I serve and continue to serve.
“This is judicial misconduct of the highest order,” he alleged.
This did not stop the panel from delivering the decision that saw the apex court upholding the lower courts’ decision.
In a short statement, the Chief Registrar’s Office said the leaked judgment was a working draft in the appeal that had not been finalised.
