Murray Hunter
Najib is maneuvering for a full pardon
The Philip George letter
Dec 01, 2024
Updated 4.46pm 1/12/24
Over the last few days there is an article circulating are “WhatsApp” communities about eh role of former Attorney General under Mahathir Mohamad’s government (2018-2020). The letter is purportedly written by a Philip George, who no one within the Malaysian legal profession knows. He is also not profiled within the UK legal profession, and has no internet history of being the person he makes out to be.
George’s article paints Tommy Thomas as the blame for what he calls a debacle. This ignores the fact he resigned on March 1, 2020 and there have been four attorney generals since his resignation – Engku Nor Faizah Engku Atek, Idrus Harun, Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Sallah, and the recent appointment of Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar.
The reason the case against former prime minister Najib Razak and former treasury head Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah for criminal breach of trust involving RM 6.6 billion in alleged payments to the International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC), owned by the Abu Dhabi government was struck out as a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) was due to the failure of the prosecutor to hand over discovery documents to the defence. This is the responsibility to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) now, and not four years ago. The trial of the above case only started two years ago, as Najib and his lawyer had to defend the SRC case, which Najib was convicted beforehand. These cases could not be conducted at the same time as Najib must be physically present in the dock for each case he is facing.
The purported article by Philip George is below:
George’s article paints Tommy Thomas as the blame for what he calls a debacle. This ignores the fact he resigned on March 1, 2020 and there have been four attorney generals since his resignation – Engku Nor Faizah Engku Atek, Idrus Harun, Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Sallah, and the recent appointment of Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar.
The reason the case against former prime minister Najib Razak and former treasury head Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah for criminal breach of trust involving RM 6.6 billion in alleged payments to the International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC), owned by the Abu Dhabi government was struck out as a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) was due to the failure of the prosecutor to hand over discovery documents to the defence. This is the responsibility to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) now, and not four years ago. The trial of the above case only started two years ago, as Najib and his lawyer had to defend the SRC case, which Najib was convicted beforehand. These cases could not be conducted at the same time as Najib must be physically present in the dock for each case he is facing.
The purported article by Philip George is below:
Tommy Thomas, the Malaysian Legal System, and the Collapse of Justice
As a solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales nearing five decades of practice, I am appalled by the incompetence and systemic failures in the country where I spent my formative years.
The recent debacle involving the DNAA (discharge not amounting to an acquittal) granted to former Prime Minister Najib Razak and former Treasury secretary-general Irwan Serigar Abdullah in the RM6.6 billion IPIC case is a damning indictment of Malaysia’s legal system.
This shameful episode reflects not only prosecutorial incompetence but also the entrenched rot of nepotism, corruption, and political bias that has derailed justice in Malaysia.
The Tommy Thomas Debacle
Tommy Thomas, hailed as a reformist attorney-general under Mahathir Mohamad’s fleeting second term, grossly mishandled the IPIC case. How could someone with such a critical role in Malaysia’s justice system bring charges without assembling a solid evidentiary foundation?
For six agonising years, the prosecution failed to produce the necessary documentary evidence, citing the absurd excuse that the documents were “not ready.” Such a glaring lack of preparedness is inexcusable and reflects the incompetence of not just Thomas but the prosecutorial arm of the Malaysian government.
A System Designed to Fail
The broader implications are even more troubling. The repeated delays and postponements of high-profile cases like this demonstrate a judiciary in disarray. Cases are brought to court without proper investigation, leaving defendants—and the nation—in legal limbo. Judges, bound by procedural rules, are left to manage cases plagued by political interference, racial biases, and cronyism.
The DNAA ruling by Justice Jamil Hussin exposed the inordinate delays and prosecutorial misconduct. Yet, this is not an isolated case. It is symptomatic of a legal system where powerful individuals play games with the rule of law, weaponising it when convenient and abandoning it when it no longer serves their purposes.
The Bumiputra Bias
Another glaring issue is the Bumiputra bias ingrained in Malaysia’s governance and legal processes. Policies favouring one group have long stifled the country’s progress, embedding a sense of entitlement that permeates even the justice system. This systemic inequity fosters corruption and a culture where accountability is reserved for those outside the ruling elite’s favor.
The DNAA ruling by Justice Jamil Hussin exposed the inordinate delays and prosecutorial misconduct. Yet, this is not an isolated case. It is symptomatic of a legal system where powerful individuals play games with the rule of law, weaponising it when convenient and abandoning it when it no longer serves their purposes.
The Bumiputra Bias
Another glaring issue is the Bumiputra bias ingrained in Malaysia’s governance and legal processes. Policies favouring one group have long stifled the country’s progress, embedding a sense of entitlement that permeates even the justice system. This systemic inequity fosters corruption and a culture where accountability is reserved for those outside the ruling elite’s favor.
Comparing Legal Systems: Malaysia and England
Having practiced law in England and Wales, I cannot help but draw sharp contrasts. In the UK, the principle of innocent until proven guilty is safeguarded by rigorous pre-trial scrutiny.
Cases are not brought to court until the evidence is thoroughly examined and the prosecution is prepared to proceed. This commitment to due process ensures that defendants are not subjected to years of uncertainty, as seen in the IPIC case.
In Malaysia, however, incompetence is normalised, and justice is too often politicised. Prosecutorial overreach, bureaucratic inefficiency, and the influence of nepotism and corruption have made a mockery of the rule of law.
A Broken System Needs Reform
Cases are not brought to court until the evidence is thoroughly examined and the prosecution is prepared to proceed. This commitment to due process ensures that defendants are not subjected to years of uncertainty, as seen in the IPIC case.
In Malaysia, however, incompetence is normalised, and justice is too often politicised. Prosecutorial overreach, bureaucratic inefficiency, and the influence of nepotism and corruption have made a mockery of the rule of law.
A Broken System Needs Reform
Malaysia’s legal system needs an overhaul, beginning with holding individuals like Tommy Thomas accountable for their failures. His tenure as attorney-general exposed not only his lack of foresight but also the deeper malaise afflicting the justice system. The IPIC case will stand as a cautionary tale for years to come—a stark reminder of what happens when justice is sacrificed for politics. I am left heartbroken to witness the decline of a country that shaped my early years. The Malaysia I knew had promise, but the one I see today has allowed incompetence, corruption, and bias to poison its institutions. For the sake of future generations, Malaysians must demand accountability and reform, or risk further erosion of their nation’s integrity.
29 November 2024
Philip George
29 November 2024
Philip George
~~~
My conclusion:
If such logic is used by Philip George in the above article is similar to his own court work, I worry for the state of the legal profession today.
This is a direct attack on Tommy Thomas and Gopal Sri Ram’s credibility, by someone who is pseudo-anonymous, or even non-existent.
In contrast, Ahmad Terrirudin and Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar have a lot to answer for. Were they incompetent, or were they directed by someone to conduct the prosecution in such a poor manner?
Be prepared for the Najib team to begin once again seeking a new pardon (full this time), based upon ‘persecution, lack of evidence, and a miscarriage of justice’.
Update:
Update:
A reader informed me that Philip George does exist. This doesn’t change my opinion, except the author is possibly verified. Someone with an email said he was Philip George. However, he didn’t answer my question as to whether he was the author of the above article or not.
Samuel7h
Whoever this Philip George, I nevertheless agree with his comments. In another article where Tommy Tomato Thomas went against the advice of his chamber staff members not to go ahead with the prosecution as they hv a weak case. The AGC has lost its independence and is just a tool of the man in power. A case of when might is right.
Gopl Raj Kumar
It matters not whether Phillip George is Phillip George British lawyer, CheDet Dr. Mahathir, Arthur Blair George Orwell, Clemens Mark Twain, Mary Ann Evans George Eliot. Whats in a name after all? As Grouch Marx said "never mind the material, just feel the width"- a metaphor worth taking into consideration when criticizing or attempting to ridicule a writer hiding behind his anonymity.
People tend to hide behind the veil of anonymity for a number of reasons the most common of these, to avoid character assassination by cowards and ignoramuses that the Malaysian legal fraternity is full of.
Why worry about whether he is really a UK lawyer or not or even on the rolls. There are hundreds if not thousands of lawyers turned writers in the commonwealth who prefer not to be on the rolls in order that they may then write freely and fairly without the restrictions placed on them by their profession. It has nothing to do with anything else. What matters in Phillip George's piecce is the content and substance of what he has to say. And he articulates well the embarrasment that is the Malaysian Bar and the Malaysian courts.
What Philip has written here is fundamentally what the problem is with Malaysia's legal system in a nutshell. The way they conducted (or misconducted more appropriately) the trial of DS Najib his family and members of his government. Phillips piece demonstrates how the misconduct and the farcical trial of DS Najib impacted on the legal profession and judiciary of Malaysia. It is a permenant stain on anyone connected to that hallowed profession who hasn't had the courage to stand up to the tyranny of incompetence and corruption which is today the backbone of the law, the legal profession and the bench of Malayia.
The SRC case conviction of Najib was proper and professionally done.
ReplyDeleteGranting Najib a full Pardon would be a miscarriage of ....
ROYALTY..
The main 1MDB case now has the judge ordering Najib to answer the case.. I don't see where any misconduct of the prosecution...
The charge against Najib and Serigar on the IPIC case is a separate matter. Very disappointing failure of the prosecution, but Najib is NOT off the hook on the main 1MDB case.