‘No need’ for judge to disclose ties

There was no link between issues in RM2.28bil 1MDB case, JC and ex-lawyer

KUALA LUMPUR: There was no “nexus” between issues in the RM2.28bil 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) case and a past connection between the trial judge and former 1MDB general counsel Jasmine Loo, the High Court has heard.

Deputy public prosecutor Kamal Baharin Omar said Loo’s involvement in 1MDB began sometime in 2011. What became an issue in the trial was the role she played in the company from 2011 onwards and not her past employment in Messrs Zain & Co between 1998 and 2008, he added.

“In an affidavit affirmed by a partner from Zain & Co, it was stated that Loo left the firm on Dec 31, 2008, whereas Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah continued to practise in the firm until his elevation as a Judicial Commissioner (JC) on June 20, 2014.

“Therefore, based on this fact alone, it was clear that Your Lordship and Loo were no longer in the same firm for about six years before Your Lordship’s appointment as JC,” the prosecutor submitted yesterday.

The prosecution contended that there was not even a need for Justice Sequerah to disclose the relationship at all as the information could be found from public records.

On July 26, Justice Sequerah revealed that he worked with Loo in the same legal firm years ago after her name was brought up in the trial.

Loo was considered a fugitive and believed to have been living overseas for years until recently, when she came back under Malaysian police custody.This prompted Najib to file a notice of motion on Aug 14 to get the judge to recuse himself from presiding over the case.

In the event the application is allowed, Najib is seeking an order of nullification of the proceedings and a discharge and acquittal, or for the case to be tried afresh with a different High Court judge, or for the proceedings to continue with a new judge.

Najib’s lead counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah argued that it was common knowledge that Loo was a fugitive and a wanted person.

He noted that there were other judges and judicial commissioners who recused themselves from hearing cases relating to Najib and 1MDb for “far less serious grounds”.

“In this case, Justice Sequerah has heard over 167 days of evidence and Loo has been mentioned in evidence at least 656 times,” Muhammad Shafee submitted.

He said in that period, the judge would have been directed to and considered evidence that would have undeniably influenced his subconscious and given rise to impressions.

“There is, as such, a real danger that the learned judge would not be able to determine, nor be seen as having determined, with the necessary level of impartiality.

“This would undermine public confidence in the due administration of justice,” he added.

After hearing the submissions, Justice Sequerah then fixed today to deliver his decision on the recusal application.

Najib, 70, is on trial for 25 charges in total – four for abuse of power that allegedly brought him financial benefit to the tune of RM2.28bil and 21 for money laundering involving the same amount of money.