THE prosecution will file a formal application for a court order to compel Najib Razak to apologise for Facebook posts he made last week in relation to his SRC International trial.

During submissions today, Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Nazlan Mohd Ghazali wanted clarification as to what prosecutors sought from the court.

“We want an apology for the past posting and an undertaking that he won’t do it in the future,” said Attorney-General Tommy Thomas, adding that the former prime minister’s posts were “sub judice” but not something that amounted to contempt.

“The application is very vague… There’s no identification of what is offensive or what amounts to sub judice,” Nazlan said later, adding that a written application by the prosecution would be preferable.

Najib last week commented on a testimony by an AmBank official who provided evidence that a credit card under his name was used on August 8 at De Grisogono, a Swiss luxury jeweller, in Italy.

The purchase amounted to €750,000 or RM3.3 million. In one of two posts, Najib said he bought gifts for a senior member of an unnamed royal and her entourage.

Earlier, Najib’s lead counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah described the submission by Thomas, that the legal matter at hand was sub judice but not contempt, as an “odd creature”.

“The issue of sub judice is always a subspecies of contempt,” Shafee said.

Last Thursday, when he raised the matter in court, Thomas said: “The first principle that is at issue is the doctrine of sub judice. It applies in Malaysia, notwithstanding whether there is a jury or not.

“Secondly, the accused must be treated equally like others. He cannot be treated like a former prime minister, who thinks he has a political audience.

“This must cease.”

Meanwhile, Nazlan also heard a submission from the defence for a court order to overturn a Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission directive to AmBank to stop giving Najib information on his accounts.

Defence lawyers said they were denied access to details of Najib’s accounts with AmBank. They are seeking documents, such as certified copies, cheque images and statements.

To obtain documents, the defence has had to get MACC’s approval, which Shafee described as “oppressive” and an abuse of investigative authority.

Shafee cited an example of MACC delaying a request for past statements until it was compelled by the court to provide them.

Ad hoc prosecutor V. Sithambaram then referred to an AmBank letter dated May 15 this year, refusing a request from Najib for specific documents.

However, the documents were eventually furnished to the defence after MACC obtained its approval. Sithambaram said the court was not the right forum for this application and that the matter should be taken up with the MACC.

Shafee responded that the documents were delayed by two months and that this was an attempt by the prosecution to “scuttle” the defence’s case.

Nazlan also heard another submission from the defence validity of the witness statement by former AmBank relationship manager Joanna Yu. The defence said her statement, which it received in January, differed from the final statement she made earlier this month.

Defence counsel Harvinderjit Singh questioned veracity of Yu’s testimony because of the differences in the draft and the final version, which was completed with the assistance of MACC officers.

The lawyer said the defence is as not as yet seeking a court order to impeach Yu.

Sithambaram responded by saying that the trial should rely on the statement with her signature.

Nazlan will make a ruling when the hearing resumes after the lunch break. – July 23, 2019.