Court of Appeal gives tongue-lashing to legal team over Najib's absence
The Court of Appeal has sternly reminded former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak that it is a court of law and not a coffee shop.
Judge Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil who is chairing the bench said this in giving a tongue-lashing to lone defence counsel Harvinder Singh Sidhu and one bailor present during proceedings today.
The panel was reacting to the lawyer’s explanation on Najib's absence from the hearing due to alleged close contact with a Covid-19 positive person.
Harvinder was asking for a postponement of today’s scheduled hearing for Najib’s application to adduce new evidence in his SRC appeal.
When the bailor, Faizal Shamsuddin, could not answer the panel’s question on the whereabouts of Najib, Karim reminded him and the lawyer that more proof is needed to justify an appellant’s non-attendance at criminal court proceedings.
The judge emphasised that being a bailor is a heavy responsibility as he or she must make effort to always know the whereabouts of the accused and ensure the accused’s attendance in court.
“Today’s hearing date has already been informed and the bailors (two for Najib) have been informed.
“We can cancel the (RM2 million) bail and issue a warrant of arrest for Najib’s non-attendance. You yourself (bailor) do not know why Najib is not here. You are just guessing.
“This is not a coffee shop, this is the court of law, do not just play guessing,” Karim sternly said.
The judge reprimanded the legal team due to only one bailor, Faizal, being present while the other, Alias Yahya, was still on the way.
Covid-19 close contact evidence needed
He reminded Harvinder that it takes more than an oral explanation to substantiate the excuse for Najib’s absence as concrete evidence is needed.
It was not only Najib who was not present but also his lead defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah and large numbers of the legal team for alleged casual and close contact with Covid-19.
Lead defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah (right)
“This is the court of law. It is not just 'air liur' (saliva) and mere talking. We need proof of the fact (alleged casual or close contact of Najib with a Covid-19 positive person),” Karim said.
When Harvinder tried to apply for the hearing to be vacated to another date, Karim questioned whether this is a tactic to vacate tomorrow’s scheduled decision on Najib’s appeal in the RM42 million SRC corruption case.
The judge noted that the application to adduce fresh evidence was filed last week, which was just days before the decision date in Najib’s appeal to quash his conviction and sentencing for the case.
Zoom proceedings
Karim also pointed out that a criminal court is empowered under the Court of Judicature Act to direct any criminal proceedings to be conducted online.
“We are in the era of (wireless) technology and there are many related practices,” he said, adding that lawyers now can even conduct Zoom proceedings without even entering the office of a law firm.
Lead deputy public prosecutor V Sithambaram who represented the prosecution agreed with the panel’s observation, adding that any allowance of a postponement posed a risk of it becoming a common excuse to be used by others in different criminal cases.
“It would become a trend if this case is allowed postponement due to someone saying he got Covid-19.
“It would lead to others citing this as an excuse for adjournment,” Sithambaram contended.
The panel then denied the lawyer’s application to postpone the additional new evidence hearing and directed it to resume at 12.30pm via Zoom.
Karim also reminded the defence team that tomorrow’s decision date for Najib’s appeal in the SRC case has not been vacated and will proceed, pending the outcome of the adduce additional evidence bid.
Tomorrow (Dec 8) has been set for a decision on Najib’s appeal to quash his conviction, RM210 million fine, and 12-year jail term for seven charges linked to the RM42 million SRC corruption case.
“This is the court of law. It is not just 'air liur' (saliva) and mere talking. We need proof of the fact (alleged casual or close contact of Najib with a Covid-19 positive person),” Karim said.
When Harvinder tried to apply for the hearing to be vacated to another date, Karim questioned whether this is a tactic to vacate tomorrow’s scheduled decision on Najib’s appeal in the RM42 million SRC corruption case.
The judge noted that the application to adduce fresh evidence was filed last week, which was just days before the decision date in Najib’s appeal to quash his conviction and sentencing for the case.
Zoom proceedings
Karim also pointed out that a criminal court is empowered under the Court of Judicature Act to direct any criminal proceedings to be conducted online.
“We are in the era of (wireless) technology and there are many related practices,” he said, adding that lawyers now can even conduct Zoom proceedings without even entering the office of a law firm.
Lead deputy public prosecutor V Sithambaram who represented the prosecution agreed with the panel’s observation, adding that any allowance of a postponement posed a risk of it becoming a common excuse to be used by others in different criminal cases.
“It would become a trend if this case is allowed postponement due to someone saying he got Covid-19.
“It would lead to others citing this as an excuse for adjournment,” Sithambaram contended.
The panel then denied the lawyer’s application to postpone the additional new evidence hearing and directed it to resume at 12.30pm via Zoom.
Karim also reminded the defence team that tomorrow’s decision date for Najib’s appeal in the SRC case has not been vacated and will proceed, pending the outcome of the adduce additional evidence bid.
Tomorrow (Dec 8) has been set for a decision on Najib’s appeal to quash his conviction, RM210 million fine, and 12-year jail term for seven charges linked to the RM42 million SRC corruption case.
I suspect Najib has already been declared innocent via behind the scenes maneuvers .
ReplyDeleteIt's all over, except for the Wayang.
So Najib is simply treating the remaining Court of Appeals proceedings with indifference, almost bordering on contempt.