KUALA LUMPUR – The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) investigation on then-high court judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali should not have been brought up in Parliament, said Malaysian Bar president Karen Cheah.
Speaking at the Bar Council today, Cheah expressed it was odd that the MACC investigation on Nazlan was raised by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Legal and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said in the recent Parliament session.
“Somebody, any of them, should have stopped (the investigation) from being raised in Parliament,” she told reporters in a press conference after a public forum on current legal matters.
“I hope that even if they (lawmakers) were not aware (of Article 127 of the federal constitution), and perhaps this particular incident can raise the awareness that they should not release the conducts of judges in Parliament of both Houses,” she added.
Article 127 of the federal constitution states the conduct of a judge may only be discussed in Parliament on a substantive motion supported by one-quarter of the total number of members, and not at all in the state legislative assemblies.
Cheah also said the MPs should speak up on the importance of having an independent judiciary for the country.
She stressed that lawmakers should speak for the country and its people’s interests, regardless of their political inclinations.
Asked about Nazlan’s stance to remain quiet in the matter, Cheah said it is not usual for judges to come forward and talk about the rationale behind their decisions in court.
She added that judges speak through their judgement, and its grounds are shared on their website. Those with access to it can view the judgement of the cases in detail – if they take the time and effort to do as such.
“They (judges) do not have to come out and defend their decision again and again. Otherwise, there is no end,”
“They have already done their jobs. So, now it is the time for us to speak up for them,” she said.
The forum saw the attendance of Cheah and other constitutional law experts such as Datuk Prof Shad Saleem Faruq, Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla, and Andrew Khoo.
During the session, the panellists discussed that criminal investigative bodies cannot publicise contents and facts on investigations without the approval of the chief justice, and that the contents must remain confidential at all times.
They also agreed that while judges are not immune to criminal investigations and prosecutions, MACC’s purview is regarding matters of corruption and other offences under the MACC Act. In light of this, the agency’s investigation of Nazlan under a conflict of ethics is outside of its power.
Nazlan was the presiding high court judge in former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s SRC International trial at the Kuala Lumpur High Court which commenced in April 2019 and delivered the guilty verdict in July 2020.
He also convicted and sentenced Najib on charges relating to RM41 million, belonging to SRC International in July 2020.
On April 21, 2022, Nazlan filed a police report over an article published by a news portal with the heading “Judge Mohd Nazlan being investigated for unexplained RM1 million in his bank account”, which alleged he was being investigated for money transferred into his bank account.
He denied the accusation, describing it as a malicious intent to undermine his credibility as a Court of Appeal judge and to disrupt the justice system as well as the judicial institution.
MACC was heavily criticised after it launched an investigation into Nazlan, with senior lawyers and politicians warning that it was an attack on the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law. – The Vibes, April 19, 2023
