Rosmah verdict: Leaked judgment 'trash', attack on judge's independence, says prosecution

KUALA LUMPUR: The prosecution has rubbished the source of the "leaked" judgment in the RM1.28bil solar hybrid trial involving Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor.

Calling it "trash", lead prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram said the post on Malaysia Today was a direct attack on the trial judge's independence.

ALSO READ: 'Impress me', judge tells defence team

He said the main crux of the application was whether the judgment by presiding judge Justice Mohamed Zaini Mazlan would be independent.

The issue at hand involved the system of judicial research which Sri Ram said had been accepted and employed in several countries such as the United States, Australia and Singapore.

ALSO READ: Ex-PM’s wife applies to disqualify High Court judge

"In Singapore, it has the system of judicial law clerks who write opinions for judges," he said here in his submission in an application by Rosmah to recuse Justice Zaini from presiding over her solar hybrid trial.

On Aug 30, Rosmah filed a last-minute application to recuse the judge and to stay the decision in her case, which is scheduled to be delivered on Thursday (Sept 1), due to a purported leaked judgment that has caused her to lose confidence in the decision.

ALSO READ: All eyes on High Court as Rosmah's trial draws to a close

Sri Ram said the question was whether the "opinion" was really the judgment of the court, whether it assists the judge in avoiding him from doing research himself and whether the two documents were not an attempt to influence the decision of the court.

"The two documents are not an attempt to influence the decision of the court. They are opinions of the writers, opinions of judicial law clerks, because it comes from the research unit," he said.

The prosecutor said what was more troubling was the allegations made by the portal.

Sri Ram did not mince his words when he directly referred to the portal's owner, Raja Petra Kamarudin.

"First, he's a fugitive from justice hiding somewhere in the United Kingdom. Secondly, he is a rogue journalist. Thirdly, his views alter according to how he is paid.

"My learned friend (Datuk Jagjit Singh) described the two papers by the research unit as trash. That is the most apt description for Raja Petra's post.... trash.

"And that is what their application is based on," he said.

Sri Ram added that even if the judge requested for the written opinion of the research unit and perused it before making his judgment, it would have been "perfectly ordinary".

Sri Ram, who is a former Federal Court judge, also shared that during his time, the then Chief Justice had suggested for him to have his own research team but he turned down the idea as he felt they would just get in his way.

"But that's just my way. Each judge has his own way," Sri Ram added.

He said the prosecution respectfully calls for the court to dismiss the application and for Justice Zaini to deliver his judgment in Rosmah's case.

Earlier, an exchange of words ensued between Justice Zaini and Rosmah's defence lawyer Datuk Jagjit Singh on what the documents really meant.

"Since you want to call a spade a garden equipment, let's just get to the point. What do you call these documents?" asked the judge.

Jagjit replied, to put it bluntly and simply, it had been prepared at the request and behest of someone of authority.

Justice Zaini: Answer my question. What do you call these two documents?

Jagjit: I cannot label them but they are incriminating.

Justice Zaini: What do you call your submission? What is the aim of your written submission?

Jagjit: To persuade your lordship. But this (the document) cannot persuade your lordship because you have to make an independent mind!

The judge then pressed on Jagjit as to what the documents were and Jagjit again, said he could not answer.

"It is in your affidavit, you say it (the document) is my judgment. Having heard you now, I'm confused," Justice Zaini said.

The two went back and forth for a time until Justice Zaini pondered, "Are you saying these are draft judgments prepared for me?"

Jagjit said it appeared to be so.

"I'm glad we can clarify that," Justice Zaini replied.

He further clarified with the counsel that his (Jagjit) argument was that the trial judge should only be furnished with submissions by the prosecution and the defence and no one else should be furnishing any opinion for the judge.

Justice Zaini: Do you see these two documents as opinion or a draft judgment?

Jagjit: To me, it doesn't seem like an opinion but it is a draft judgment written by a third party.

Justice Zaini: Are you insinuating that I would therefore use the draft judgment (in my decision)?

Jagjit: That's where the real danger of bias comes in... the perception.

Justice Zaini: I think I understand where your angle is.

Justice Zaini will deliver his decision on the recusal application on Thursday afternoon.