PUTRAJAYA: It was “mindboggling” for the Federal Court not to grant an adjournment to Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s then solicitors and counsel to effectively prepare for his final appeal in the RM42mil SRC International Sdn Bhd case, says his lawyer.
Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah said there was no ploy to delay the proceedings back in August last year.
“In this entire context, one fails to understand why the Federal Court was adopting the speed in which it undertook to complete this appeal and to deliver a verdict,” he said yesterday.
Muhammad Shafee also “attacked” Najib’s previous law firm, Zaid Ibrahim Suflan TH Liew & Partners (ZIST), that took over from his firm, Messrs Shafee & Co, during the final appeal.
He claimed that the previous solicitor, ZIST, had never done criminal law in their career, especially complicated cases such as the SRC International Sdn Bhd case.
Despite this, ZIST was appointed by Najib with the assurance that the Federal Court would give them reasonable time to prepare before the main appeal hearing.
The lawyer did not mince his words as he made his submission at the hearing of Najib’s application at the Federal Court to have Najib’s conviction and sentence in the SRC International case reviewed.
According to Muhammad Shafee, Najib’s legal fiasco during the final appeal began after the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed his application to have Queen’s Counsel Jonathan Laidlaw on July 21, 22.
Laidlaw is a UK-based lawyer who sought to be admitted ad hoc in the High Court of Malaya for him to be able to represent Najib in the Federal Court appeal.
In his written submission, Muhammad Shafee said it was after this event that Najib was then approached and advised by Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who is a partner at ZIST and a former minister in Najib’s Cabinet.
He said Najib had replaced his firm, Messrs Shafee & Co, upon the advice of Zaid and Zaid’s Singaporean partner Niru Pillai.
On the advice of ZIST, Najib then appointed Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik to be the new lead counsel, who had echoed the same sentiment about the good prospects of getting an adjournment in view of having a new law firm on board.
Hisyam had asked for an adjournment of between three and four months to allow him to make the best preparations for the main appeal because he had just taken over the case.
The prosecution, Muhammad Shafee said, did not object to the adjournment application.
He questioned the Federal Court’s speed in which it undertook to complete the appeal and to deliver a verdict.
“He (Hisyam) asked for one adjournment. Why are we in a hurry?” he added.
The hearing continues on Feb 20 before a five-judge panel chaired by Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Abdul Rahman Sebli.
Najib is seeking to review the Federal Court’s decision of Aug 23, 2022, which upholds the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s decision to convict and sentence him to 12 years in jail and a RM210mil fine in the RM42mil SRC International case.
On Sept 6 last year, he applied for a review of the Federal Court’s decision, claiming a “miscarriage of justice” in his case.
