LAWYER Muhammad Shafee Abdullah’s comments regarding the ongoing SRC International case were nothing more than “chest-thumping” and had no malicious intent, his counsel Harvinderjit Singh said in Shafee’s contempt of court hearing in the Kuala Lumpur High Court, today.

Harvinderjit added that the prosecution’s case against his client had little to go on other than allegations of mens rea, or criminal intent.

“With respect, this is a chest-thumping statement,” Harvinderjit said, referring to Shafee’s comment published by Malaysiakini on February 7, 2019.

“Can we really say now, going over it, we will develop this impression that if the judge is not straight, Najib is going to be convicted?” he said referring to former prime minister Najib Razak, on trial for alleged corruption in the SRC International case, for whom Shafee is defence counsel.

The hearing, presided upon by Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohd Firuz Jaffril, is to determine whether the Umno lawyer should be cited for contempt over comments made about the case.

Attorney-General Tommy Thomas was granted leave to initiate contempt proceedings for the comments published by Malaysiakini’s video section KiniTV.

In the video, when asked about his chances of success in the 1MDB trial, Shafee told reporters at the Kuala Lumpur Court complex: “Well, we have been preparing a long time. But there’s always, last minute, a lot of changes. That has been disturbed.”

“But we think our case is very good. If we have the judge alone, do not influence the judge, if the judge is straight, if witnesses are not coached, and not fabricated evidence, we should win. Much to your surprise. My opinion is we should win.”

Shafee was present at today’s hearing.

In his submission, Harvinderjit referred to the PCP Construction Sdn Bhd vs Leap Modulation Sdn Bhd contempt ruling, where the Federal Court, on April 23, sentenced lawyer Arun Kasi to 30 days imprisonment.

“In the Arun Kasi case, there was intent to publish. Here, they (the prosecution) have cryptically written three different sort of mens rea.

“Where in this statement does it show the connotation of these words?

Defence counsel David Matthews, meanwhile, argued the contempt proceeding should be heard before the SRC International judge, Justice Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

He said the prosecution appears to “dwell” on the court’s power to punish people for contempt instead of stating anything more specific in its submission.

Matthews said Article 126 of the Federal Constitution and Section 13 of the Courts of Judicature Act, do not place a restriction on where the application for contempt can be filed.

“The issue is not whether this court has jurisdiction…It does not mean all courts are equally appropriate to hear this case, such as Kangar, Termeloh, Muar or Taiping.”

Matthews also mentioned an article published by an unnamed news portal last week about the contempt hearing, which he said impugned the conduct of deputy public prosecutor Shamsul Bolhassan.

“I feel compelled to say that it cast my learned friend in bad light. I feel bad for him and I feel compelled to stand up for him,” Matthews said.

“I think it is quite unfair, I know him to be an outstanding lawyer. There is certainly not a lazy bone in him.

“I feel the media should be more careful in their choice of words.”

The case continues on Friday. – May 27,2019.