On May 21st recently, MACC announced they have submitted their Investigation Paper on Justice Dato Nazlan Ghazali to the Attorney General.
Two days earlier, one of the recently vocal five former Bar Council Presidents defending Nazlan, namely Dato Mah Weng Kwai demanded MACC to reveal their investigation.
It is a strange request.
As a former Court of Appeal judge and protege to Dato Eusoff Chin of the infamous VK Lingam tape judicial scandal, Mah knows well that MACC could not reveal their investigation to the public. It is only for the purview of the Attorney General.
Unlike after GE14, there is more confidence that MACC's IP represent the investigation body's own probe.
MACC today is not led by a PH-appointed politician. Dato Seri Gopal Sri Ram does not have an office there as rumoured when PH new government was then in a hurry to pin charges against Najib and Rosmah.
Mah's request indicate he is aware the investigation Bar tried to obstruct went ahead despite Ambiga-led public pressure to protect uncle Sri Ram from having his cover blown.
And, Mah's flip flop could also indicate he sensed there is justified concern against Nazlan.
At the Bar Council EGM
|5 minutes before EGM commenced|
It proves there is no need for prior Tribunal to be held or Chief Justice direction for investigation on criminal offenses committed by judges to be investigated.
More so, the court has no capability and capacity to undertake investigation themselves to support any decision to be taken.
This was pointed out from the floor at the Bar EGM yesterday that police cannot wait for CJ decision before a judge who hypothetically committed murder to be arrested.
The media did not report, but lawyers in attendance informed that all resolutions tabled at the insufficient quorum EGM were rejected except to hold the peaceful walk. There was no resolution passed to protest against judicial interference or intimidation. So the lawyers can jalan jalan over nothing.
In the first place, former CJ Tan Sri Richard Malanjum was not the first Malaysian to be appointed to the UN's ombudsmen to deserve special honour from the Bar.
Ambiga & Co. tried to shed a good light on Malanjum before for an impending national embarassment on him for assigning Nazlan the big SRC case as his first ever criminal case.
Nazlan conflicted and compromised?
There is strong and widespread discussion and view within the judicial and legal community that Nazlan was conflicted and should have recused himself from the SRC case.
He was Maybank's General Counsel when they recommended for the establishment of SRC and approved loan for 1MDB to takeover an IPP.
Defender of Nazlan argued he may not be directly involved. Maybank do thousands of proposals and it is beyond the legal department to go through each and every.
What if the e-mail Raja Petra claimed to and from Nazlan turned out true?
Bear in mind that the time between RPK's revelation to MACC's submission of IP to AGC is a short one month. It could be an open and shut case similar to their short investigation of Syed Saddiq.
If MACC provided insufficient evidence, AGC would have already rejected the IP and request further investigation, argued FBer Syed Agil. While Najib supporter Lim Sian See viewed that there is a basis for the IP. AGC have not classified the probe as No Further Action (NFA).
LSS is more interested in the email as proof of Nazlan's direct involvement. If there is, Tan Sri Idrus Harun would then be obliged to request for a mistrial on SRC.
Should it be a mistrial, the public outcry would be redirected from their anger towards guilty Najib to the shaddy work of law enforcement, AGC and judiciary.
As one opposition politician viewed, there will be a need for a major reset of the whole Malaysian justice system. Idrus is likely holding out for more convincing and indisputable evidence before releasing the bomb.
In the meanwhile, the wind is whispering rumours that Nazlan could not explain for the 11 transactions amounting to RM1 million banked into his account and part of the RM2 million he received mentioned by RPK.
Could it be similar to Jho Loh's alleged bribe to Zeti, Nor Mohamed Yakcop and 1MDB officials for mutual benefit?
RPK also revealed there is major error in the designed charge. Money trail on SRC did not come from 1MDB but loan raised by Putra Perdana.
Najib deserve to be acquited, but it is believed he prefer a retrial to clear his name.
Cartel of senior lawyers and judges?
The hints and indications are everywhere, but the proofs will need to be substantiated with investigation by proper authorities.
Yesterday, RPK latest video upload made a startling revelation of rampant practises of case fixing and judge fixing in Malaysia. Without holding back, he outrightly pointed his accusation at Sri Ram and VK Linggam.
RPK detailed his allegations in the hard hitting posting entitled Gopal Sri Ram: Putting the lunatic in charge of running the asylum.
It looks to be RPK's old score with Mahathir. Nevertheless, such happening is not the first heard. Accused, lawyers, and judges have long shared similar experiences and down to naming names.
Is it possible more such judicial scandals will be coming out soon?
Current CJ, Tengku Maimoon must be feeling the heat for recently being defensive of the open criticisms made against judges. It is obvious she was referring to RPK's revelation made against Nazlan.
It has never happened before, but now public via social media are openly questioning CJ for biasness and being over protective of judges. Privately several lawyers expressed the opinion that Tengku Maimoon is prejudiced and not qualified to preside the appeal of SRC.
In a strange deviation from the past, Bar is supporting Tengku Maimoon using the politically motivated excuse to defend judiciary against alleged interference and allegation.
Bar is historically anti-establishment and usually attack and criticise the judiciary. They could be motivated by her leaning for basic structure doctrine as practised in India which Bar activists have long been fighting for.
However, Bar's attitude is not strange to a group of young lawyers. In a private conversation before Covid lockdown, they shared their view that Bar is not a professional body dedicated to the legal profession.
The politically inclined accused Bar as an opposition tool. On the contrary, the young lawyers described Bar as a cartel of senior lawyers having monopoly over the big ticket legal work.
They believed those dominating Bar are colluding with certain judges at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court level. Consequently, It Bar's reaction indicate the cartel's bread and butter is under threat by RPK's revelation.
A source who lives and breathes in court rooms revealed few of the vocal five former Bar Presidents are linked to certain judges. No names will be shared for it is libelous.
The hypocrasy behind the Bar, CJ and certain legal personalities' vocal defense of judiciary have been widely revealed, highlighted and argued on social media.
It is the response of former CJ, Tun Hamid Mohamed that knocked the issue right on the nail. He wrote in his personal website, reproduced below:
Judiciary Intimidated: The Other View
Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad
More will unfold in the next few weeks and hopefully judiciary and AG will be pursuing for the truth and justice over legal precision.
Since this issue has its own political implication, recent political development may have bearing on the outcome. RPK mentioned there is no way in hell the pro-Mahathir judges will be sympathetic and Najib and Rosmah will surely face imprisonment.
It is interesting statement not because it is bold. Moreover it is a widely held view. RPK's view seemed to tally with his latest narrative to defend Tajuddin Rahman as saviour of Muafakat Nasional, unproven expose of Mohamed Hassan, and negative perception building against Zahid.
It is only fair game. Nevertheless, agree to disagree.