The Opposition is very displeased that their demonisation strategy to rubbish Attorney General Tan Sri Apandi Mohamed Ali’s (AG) decision of the treatment on the 1MDB investigations based on the so called donation RM2.6 billion and SRC International conducted by MACC submitted on 31 Dec 2015, still stands.
Sin Chew Jit Poh posting Bernama report:
Appeals by Malaysian Bar, Zaid and Khairuddin dismissed
PUTRAJAYA, April 4 (Bernama) — The Court of Appeal today dismissed the appeals by three appellants including the Malaysian Bar for leave to commence a judicial review to challenge the Attorney-General’s (AG) decision over closure of investigations relating to the RM2.6 billion donation.
The decision was made by a three-member panel comprising Justice Datuk Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Tan Sri Idrus Harun and Datuk Abdul Rahman Sebli.
Justice Umi Kalthum who chaired the panel said they unanimously agreed to dismiss all three appeals with no orders as to the cost and affirmed the order of the High Court.
The Malaysian Bar, former Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Zaid Ibrahim and former Batu Kawan Umno vice head Datuk Seri Khairuddin Abu Hassan were appealing against a High Court’s refusal to grant them leave to initiate a judicial review.
The trio sought among others to quash Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali’s decision to absolve Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak of wrongdoing over the RM2.6 billion deposited into his account.
On Nov 11, last year, High Court Judge Datuk Hanipah Farikullah rejected the trio’s leave applications, ruling that the AG had absolute discretion under Article 145 of Federal Constitution on prosecution and the court had no jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Zaid filed his application on Feb 2, last year seeking for an order to quash the AG’s decision and compelling him to institute criminal proceedings against the prime minister under the appropriate provisions of the Penal Code and/or the MACC Act 2009.
The AG had on Jan 26, last year found that no criminal offence was committed by Najib in relation to SRC International Sdn Bhd and the alleged RM2.6 billion donation.
In his application filed on Feb 3, last year, Khairuddin wanted a court order to quash the decision by Mohamed Apandi to exonerate Najib of any wrongdoing relating to the MACC investigations into three matters.
Khairuddin sought to challenge Mohamed Apandi’s decision that he was satisfied that no criminal offence was committed by Najib pertaining to the RM2.6 billion donation, transfer of funds by SRC International into his personal banking account and provision of a loan by pension fund KWAP to SRC International.
In March last year, the Bar also filed the application seeking to quash the decision communicated by the AG through a press release issued on Jan 26, last year that no criminal offence had been committed by Najib in relation to three investigation papers submitted by the MACC to the AG.
Malaysian Bar president George Varughese told the media he would seek legal advice on whether to file leave to appeal to the Federal Court.
Zaid’s counsel Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram said his solicitors were confident in obtaining instructions to take the matter further while Khairuddin’s lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla said he would take the matter to the Federal Court.
– See more at: http://www.mysinchew.com/node/117355#sthash.kKwma5p7.dpuf
The official website of the Attorney General Chambers stated:
The Attorney General is the principal legal adviser to the Government. His role and responsibilities are provided for in Article 145 of the Federal Constitution. Article 145 of the Federal Constitution provides:
(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister, appoint a person who is qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court to be the Attorney General for the Federation.
(2) It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet or any Minister upon such legal matters, and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet, and to discharge the functions conferred on him by or under this Constitution or any other written law.
(3) The Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court or a court-martial.
(3A) Federal law may confer on the Attorney General power to determine the courts in which or the venue at which any proceedings which he has power under Clause (3) to institute shall be instituted or to which such proceedings shall be transferred.
(4) In the performance of his duties the Attorney General shall have the right of audience in , and shall take precedence over any other person appearing before, any court or tribunal in the Federation.
(5) Subject to Clause (6), the Attorney General shall hold office during the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and may at any time resign his office and, unless he is a member of the Cabinet, shall receive such remuneration as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may determine.
(6) The person holding the office of Attorney General immediately prior to the coming into operation of this Article shall continue to hold the office on terms and conditions not less favourable than those applicable to him immediately before such coming into operation and shall not be removed from office except on the like grounds and in the like manner as a judge of the Federal Court.
Solicitors for UMNO convincingly put forth the arguments for the power of the AG and attempts by the Bar Council to remove him.
Albeit the noble move taken by The Bar, there is a certain group within the legal profession which has expressed an unfavorable response towards the move namely The Judicial and Legal Service Officers Association of Malaysia (JALSOA), quoting that the move is “obstructing the exercise of powers and discretion of the AG as provided by Clause (3) of Article 145 of the Federal Constitution,”. On the other hand, the Bar Council has taken its dissatisfaction to a judicial level by filing a judicial review application in the court asking for review of decision of the AG in closing the case relating to Prime Minister and 1MDB, where the AG decided not to initiate any proceedings against the Prime Minister.
It is utter disgrace and gross dishonour for the Bar Council to challenge the discretion of His Majesty Seri Paduka Baginda Yang DiPertuan Agong to empower the AG on all legal matters representing the Crown, on behalf of the people.
The Bar Council, Zaid and Khairuddin used the courts to stage their extended sordid political drama.
The drama by one of those seemingly a Drama Queen minion to this extended drama being spun at spur-sharged-over-drive into globally scandalous notion, trying to warm the hopes up of the detractors harping on the demonisation strategy against Prime Minister Najib.
NST online story:
Swiss attorney general upbeat on prospects for 1MDB probe
Switzerland’s Attorney General Michael Lauber says the probe into 1MDB is making progress based on money-laundering reports, bank documents and work with Singapore and other countries. AP
By Reuters – April 5, 2017 @ 5:39pm
BERN: Swiss Attorney General Michael Lauber expressed confidence on Wednesday that his money laundering probe into scandal-hit Malaysian fund 1MDB would bear fruit despite Malaysian authorities’ refusal to cooperate.
“It’s not hopeless, in fact it’s the opposite,” Lauber told a news conference, saying the probe was making progress based on money-laundering reports, bank documents and work with Singapore and other countries.
“It would have been very desirable from our perspective if Malaysia had cooperated,” he said. But “we’re still confident that we can successfully conclude the process in this area, in particular in the open cases against the two banks,” he said, referring to Swiss private banks BSI and Falcon.
Malaysia again rebuffed Switzerland’s request for legal assistance in probing 1MDB, Lauber’s office had said in November.–REUTERS
The fact is that, has yet any of the basis of criminal conduct in this over-rated trumped up case been properly and legally established with indisputable evidence to be the case unto prima facie?
According to 1MDB, which is supposedly the victim and aggrieved party to these web of sophisticated globally networked white collar crimes, have not been contacted by any foreign authorities pertaining on investigations their respective home turf.
This include the Suisse AGO.
Interestingly, there have been no such charges of embezzlement, money laundering and/or fraud and sundry ever brought upon against any 1MDB officials at country where the strategic investment company is based.
The Bar Council and Zaid, being guild and member of the trade professionals should be seriously reprimanded for demonstration to the Crown of gross unbecoming of professionals and wasting the court’s time and resources.