APRIL 7 — Only the judiciary has authority to evaluate alleged breaches of ethics involving Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, asserted Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reforms) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said.

Nazlan was the judge who tried, convicted and sentenced ex-prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the SRC International case, Azalina added that the federal government abided by the principle that the judiciary has the authority and that the judiciary exercises its powers independently of the executive and the legislature under the doctrine of separation of powers.

Azalina said that the federal government abided by the principle that the judiciary has the authority and that the judiciary exercises its powers independently of the executive and the legislature under the doctrine of separation of powers. — Bernama pic
Azalina said that the federal government abided by the principle that the judiciary has the authority and that the judiciary exercises its powers independently of the executive and the legislature under the doctrine of separation of powers. — Bernama pic

She was responding to reports of her letter to Shafee & Co who represented Najib in the case.

Azalina had earlier referred to her previous parliamentary reply on February 23 to oral questions by Tenggara MP Manndzri Nasib and Tasek Gelugor MP Datuk Wan Saiful Wan Jan, who had wanted to know about a purported leak of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) investigation on Nazlan’s case and the outcome of the investigation.

Hansard recorded Azalina’s reply as follows:

“Saya telah dimaklumkan oleh pihak SPRM melalui surat bertarikh 21 Februari bahawa satu laporan SPRM terhadap Yang Arif Dato’ Mohd Nazlan bin Mohd Ghazali telah dikemukakan pada tarikh yang sama kepada Yang Amat Arif Ketua Hakim Negara berhubung pelanggaran peraturan di bawah Kod Etika Hakim 2009.

“Tiada makluman lanjut mengenai perkara ini dimaklumkan kepada saya melalui surat tersebut. Perkara ini juga tertakluk kepada keputusan Yang Amat Arif Ketua Hakim Negara selaras dengan fasal-fasal (3) dan (3A), Perkara 125 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

“Di bawah fasal (3) Perkara 145, Peguam Negara ataupun Pendakwa Raya juga mempunyai kuasa untuk membolehkan dijalankan menurut budi bicaranya untuk memulakan apa-apa prosiding bagi apa-apa kesalahan.

“Kuasa budi bicara yang diberikan kepada Peguam Negara di bawah fasal (3) Perkara 145 amat luas dan boleh menuduh mana-mana orang termasuk seseorang hakim sekiranya keterangan bagi sesuatu kesalahan memenuhi segala elemen pertuduhan tersebut.

“Namun yang demikian, kerajaan tidak akan campur tangan dalam kuasa Peguam Negara ataupun Pendakwa Raya.”

Azalina said her letter to the law firm, dated March 20, was but a reiteration of her parliamentary reply.

Now, the minister’s parliamentary reply was a day before the Federal Court delivered its judgment on February 24 that the MACC investigation of Nazlan was unconstitutional, illegal and undermines the independence of the judiciary.

That judgment binds the minister. Her letter to the law firm could not reiterate her parliamentary reply. It should instead reiterate the judgment of the apex court.

One can therefore agree with William Leong Jee Keen that the minister “acted injudiciously in writing her letter of reply dated 20 March 2023 to Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s solicitors, Shafee & Co.”

* This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.