10.50am: Defence counsel Jagjit Singh orally submits that dark clouds have descended on the judiciary since Aug 23.
He says this was similar to what happened in 1988, referring to the removal of the then chief justice Salleh Abbas, historically known as the judicial crisis.
Jagjit claims that dark clouds descended again on Aug 23 this year, possibly referring to the apex court’s dismissal of an appeal by Rosmah's husband, former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak in his RM42 million SRC appeal.
There was an alleged leak of Najib's court judgment, prior to the apex court on Aug 23 upholding the conviction and sentencing of the former premier over seven criminal charges linked to RM42 million of funds from SRC.
Lawyer: Defence only needs to prove danger of bias
10.43am: Rosmah Mansor's lawyer Jagjit Singh orally submits that the law does not require an applicant to produce cogent evidence to prove bias on the part of the judge.
Rosmah’s defence lawyer Jagjit Singh
The lawyer says they only produce what they can and leave it to court to determine whether there is a danger of bias.
He submits that the test is whether there is one.
Lawyer: Rosmah's recusal bid not hearsay
10.40am: Defence counsel Jagjit Singh denies the prosecution's assertion that the recusal bid against trial judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan is based on hearsay evidence.
The lawyer says this is because the court had previously lodged a police report over the alleged leak judgment incident, and that the Sentul district police chief was reported confirming the authorities are investigating the matter under the Official Secrets Act and the Penal Code.
Proceedings resume
The lawyer says they only produce what they can and leave it to court to determine whether there is a danger of bias.
He submits that the test is whether there is one.
Lawyer: Rosmah's recusal bid not hearsay
10.40am: Defence counsel Jagjit Singh denies the prosecution's assertion that the recusal bid against trial judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan is based on hearsay evidence.
The lawyer says this is because the court had previously lodged a police report over the alleged leak judgment incident, and that the Sentul district police chief was reported confirming the authorities are investigating the matter under the Official Secrets Act and the Penal Code.
Proceedings resume
Trying to get Rosmah-Jib off the hook via procedural dramas , just like what Zaid Ibrahim and Hisyam Teh tried is a fools errand.
ReplyDeleteYou get your client acquitted by refuting or negating the prosecution's case. First Shafee Abdullah then Zaid Ibrahim and Hisyam Teh totally failed to this, so Najib is now in jail, and Rosmah may well be on the losing end, still subject to appeal.
A draft judgement that the Judge was working on during the final week of the trial, perhaps leaked, perhaps not accurate, does not make the case of bias.
You think judges write up the whole judgement at the last hour ? Like anyone working on a major project, they draft up their thoughts along the way, change their ideas along the way if necessary , as trial evidence develops, and the final conclusion is done just before the judgement is read out...
The problem is, it appears the Malaysian Court software system security is atrociously bad, and any number of staff may be able to access drafts and Court Notes that the Judge input along the way, and pass it straight on to Raja Petra Kamaruddin, perhaps with creative embellishments added in process
In 1998 , the blatant interference by Mahathir against the judiciary were obvious for everyone to see, even in those pre-Internet days.
ReplyDeleteMahathir publicly criticising the Courts as acting contrary to the wishes of the Executive (meaning him) ,
- swiftly getting the Agong to appointing the Special tribunal to remove the Supreme Court (as it was then known) judges who were adjudicating the UMNO case
- the tribunal including the person directly benefiting if the Lord President were removed (he would be next in line)
The allegation of bias and interference in the Court today - where is the evidence ?
The so-called leaked judgements are symptom of poor IT security in the Malaysian Court network system, as well as the obvious prevalence of pro-UMNO, pro-Najib agents in the Court Administration.
The existence of Justices writing draft judgements very late in the trial process is nothing sinister. Its part of the Justices work-in-progress, it doesn't mean somebody is ghost writing the judgements.