Zaid sues Bar president over abusing judicial process claim
Zaid Ibrahim has mounted a defamation suit against Malaysian Bar president Karen Cheah over her allegation of misconduct related to Najib Abdul Razak’s appeal in the RM42 million SRC International corruption case.
The former de facto law minister and two other senior partners of law firm Zaid Ibrahim Suflan TH Liew & Partners (Zist), filed the civil action at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on Sept 30.
Previously, through a letter of demand on Aug 26, Zaid (above) and his partners demanded that Cheah makes a full and unequivocal retraction and apology for her media statement issued on Aug 19.
Then on Sept 2, Cheah told the media she stands by the Bar’s media statement and is prepared to meet Zaid and the other two lawyers in court.
The press statement in question was about the alleged conduct of Najib’s lawyers from Zist, who represented the former prime minister during his appeal to set aside his conviction as well as his 12-year jail sentence and RM210 million fine in the SRC case.
Najib is currently serving his jail term, following the apex court's dismissal of his appeal on Aug 23.
According to a copy of the writ of summons sighted by Malaysiakini, the three plaintiffs - Zaid, Liew Teck Huat, and Rueben Mathiavaranam - named the Malaysian Bar and Cheah as the first and second defendants.
Malaysian Bar president Karen Cheah
Through the statement of claim, the plaintiffs claimed the press release was published on the Bar website with neither notice nor verification sought from them beforehand.
The trio claimed the purported defamatory media statement was further republished in several news portals.
The plaintiffs claimed the issuance of the media statement amounted to a breach of statutory duty on the part of the Bar and Cheah.
They claimed this is because any complaints of misconduct should have been made and referred to the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board as per Section 99(1) of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) 1976.
Didn’t refer to disciplinary board
The trio contended that the provision conferred exclusive power on the said board to deal with matters of conduct of lawyers and that its wording connoted that any such disciplinary process should not be tainted by any premature finding of guilt in whatever form before such a complaint is lodged with the board.
The trio claimed that the LPA does not grant the right, power or duty to the Bar and Cheah to make findings of guilt in matters concerning the conduct of lawyers, such as through the issuing of the media statement.
They claimed that instead of referring a complaint to the board, the Bar and Cheah caused the publication of the media statement, which allegedly condemned them as guilty of professional misconduct.
The trio alleged that this amounted to the Bar and Cheah prejudging them without any finding and determination by the disciplinary board.
Through the legal action, the plaintiffs seek general and aggravated damages, interest, and a permanent injunction to restrain the Bar and Cheah from further publishing defamatory words.
The three are also seeking several declarations, among them that the publication of the media statement is not the proper or correct method or forum for any alleged misconduct and is in contravention of the provisions of the LPA.
The Bar and Cheah have entered their response to the matter via a copy of a memorandum of appearance filed on Oct 7 by law firm Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill.
Under the law for civil action after being served with the cause papers, defendants who enter their appearance means they are going to defend themselves against the legal action.
Zaid, Liew, and Rueben are represented by counsel from Zist.
According to lawyers for both the plaintiffs and defendants, the civil action is set for case management before the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today.
Through the statement of claim, the plaintiffs claimed the press release was published on the Bar website with neither notice nor verification sought from them beforehand.
The trio claimed the purported defamatory media statement was further republished in several news portals.
The plaintiffs claimed the issuance of the media statement amounted to a breach of statutory duty on the part of the Bar and Cheah.
They claimed this is because any complaints of misconduct should have been made and referred to the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board as per Section 99(1) of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) 1976.
Didn’t refer to disciplinary board
The trio contended that the provision conferred exclusive power on the said board to deal with matters of conduct of lawyers and that its wording connoted that any such disciplinary process should not be tainted by any premature finding of guilt in whatever form before such a complaint is lodged with the board.
The trio claimed that the LPA does not grant the right, power or duty to the Bar and Cheah to make findings of guilt in matters concerning the conduct of lawyers, such as through the issuing of the media statement.
They claimed that instead of referring a complaint to the board, the Bar and Cheah caused the publication of the media statement, which allegedly condemned them as guilty of professional misconduct.
The trio alleged that this amounted to the Bar and Cheah prejudging them without any finding and determination by the disciplinary board.
Through the legal action, the plaintiffs seek general and aggravated damages, interest, and a permanent injunction to restrain the Bar and Cheah from further publishing defamatory words.
The three are also seeking several declarations, among them that the publication of the media statement is not the proper or correct method or forum for any alleged misconduct and is in contravention of the provisions of the LPA.
The Bar and Cheah have entered their response to the matter via a copy of a memorandum of appearance filed on Oct 7 by law firm Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill.
Under the law for civil action after being served with the cause papers, defendants who enter their appearance means they are going to defend themselves against the legal action.
Zaid, Liew, and Rueben are represented by counsel from Zist.
According to lawyers for both the plaintiffs and defendants, the civil action is set for case management before the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today.
The Bar Council was expressing what a majority of lawyers in Malaysia thought as well.
ReplyDeleteZaid Ibrahim has done tremendous damage to his own professional reputation in the course of the Bossku maneuvers, and the suit is just trying to claw that back a little.