PUTRAJAYA (Feb 27): Lead defence counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah told the Federal Court on Monday (Feb 27) that there was no mala fide (bad faith) in the intention of the previous defence of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to seek an adjournment of the SRC International Sdn Bhd appeal.

He reiterated that solicitor general Datuk Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh had not objected to the adjournment, so it would be wrong for the prosecution to suggest that there was "something sinister" in the defence seeking to postpone the trial.

Shafee explained that the previous lead counsel, Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, had indicated as early as Aug 15 that he needed time to better prepare the main appeal after the apex court had dismissed his earlier application regarding trial judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

“The prosecution has failed to respond to the allegation that three law firms, and the former premier, are in conspiracy to adjourn it (the trial).

“If the prosecution had in August not accused Najib’s defence of bad intention in seeking an adjournment by not objecting to it then, they should not come now to accuse the defence of bad intention. There has never been any bad intention,” he said.

Shafee further asked why this allegation was not properly handled by the previous bench.

“It is every right [of] the litigant and the counsel for them to be better prepared. Without preparation, it would be dishonour to the court. That is what the previous Federal Court bench failed to recognise,” he reiterated.

Shafee was replying to the prosecution’s assertion that the defence had possibly acted in bad faith as they were already given four months before the August hearing date.

The prosecution had also claimed that the move by Najib to change solicitors from Messr Shafee & Co to Messrs Zaid Ibrahim, Suflan and TH Liew Partnership (ZIST) and lead counsel to Hisyam could have been a ploy, which was recognised by the court.

The senior counsel further disagreed that ZIST had two months to prepare the case as highlighted by the prosecution, citing the Datuk Zaid Ibrahim interview with Astro Awani.

Shafee argued that just because Zaid had mentioned that he had gone through the 30,000 case pages does not mean that his team had prepared for the trial.

He said the previous team wanted to deal with the single point on Nazlan’s conflict of interests concerning the case, and if that was not successful they would apply for an adjournment.

“To suggest Hisyam and I have an agenda or reason for us to engineer an adjournment of this case is wrong,” he added.

Shafee further said it was also wrong for the previous bench not to allow Hisyam to discharge himself as counsel when he offered to do so as he indicated he needed time to prepare the case.

This, he added, was against the court’s own practice directives which allow for such discharge.

The lawyer also said again that it was also wrong for the previous bench to not give the full grounds of its decision and pointed out that the three to four paragraphs in last August’s verdict to reject the appeal, when there were 94 grounds laid by the defence, was insufficient reasoning.

The senior counsel is expected to finish his reply on Tuesday (Feb 28) over Najib’s review of the 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine given by the Federal Court last August after it upheld the former PM’s conviction in the SRC case.

The review is being heard before a five-member bench led by Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Datuk Abdul Rahman Sebli. Federal Court judges Datuk Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Datuk Rhodzhariah Bujang and Datuk Nordin Hassan as well as Court of Appeal judge Datuk Abu Bakar Jais are the other members of the bench.

Read also:
Prosecution says FB posting by CJ’s husband not on SRC