FORMER Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram was appointed the senior deputy public prosecutor (DPP) in Najib Razak’s 1MDB cases solely to get the accused  charged and convicted, lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah said today.

He said this was because Sri Ram, as the DPP, decided what evidence and documents needed to be produced in court.

“It is not important for Sri Ram to know the source of Najib’s monies either in the SRC International Sdn Bhd or 1MDB case. What was important to him was to charge Najib,” he said in his submission for the former prime minister’s bid to disqualify Sri Ram from participating in his 1MDB-linked cases.

“The appointment of Sri Ram was particularly navigated with the purpose to get Najib charged and convicted,” he claimed.

Meanwhile, Najib’s other counsel, Harvinderjit Singh argued that the public prosecutor (attorney-general) did not have the power to appoint a lawyer (Sri Ram) as a part-time DPP and who is a practising lawyer at the same time under Section 376 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

“The exercise of power under Section 376 is wrong. It’s unreasonable, irrational, and considerably improper,” Harvinderjit submitted.

He added that Sri Ram was appointed to fulfil the promises of the Pakatan Harapan government by referring to a series of WhatsApp conversations between Sri Ram and former AG Mohamed Apandi Ali on May 12, 2018, three days after the general election.

“Sri Ram had advised Mohamed Apandi to charge Najib. In that message, Sri Ram had already determined Najib as a criminal despite there being no investigation paper open at the material time. He had already pre-determined the criminality. What’s worse, he had already determined that Najib was going to face the music,” he said, adding that the appointment of Sri Ram was mala fide (in bad faith) and irrational. 

Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan who represented the AG/public prosecutor, the government and Sri Ram, said the appointment of Sri Ram was in accordance with the law.

“It is respectfully submitted that the language of Section 376 (3) (of CPC) is broad and permissive of the appointment of Sri Ram as a senior DPP. Section 376(3) does not expressly limit the potential senior DPP from only among the legal officers serving under the judicial and legal service,” he said.

Shamsul added that the government, like any private party, can choose and appoint or authorise any advocate to appear on their behalf in any court of law.

“It is respectfully submitted that it is a sheer intellectual waste to engage in hair-splitting argument on the legality of Sri Ram appointment under Section 376(3) CPC,” he said.

High Court Judge Mariana Yahya fixed July 29  for further submissions from Najib and Shafee on their applications for a judicial review to challenge the attorney-general’s decision to appoint Sri Ram as a deputy public prosecutor under Section 376 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Shafee is Najib’s counsel in the bid for the judicial review while also applying for a review to recuse Sri Ram from his own RM9.5 million money-laundering trial, which has yet to commence.

They seek a court order to revoke Sri Ram’s appointment or recuse him, saying that his letter of appointment is invalid and a declaration that there is a conflict of interest in Sri Ram’s appointment and request for an order to prohibit him from leading the prosecution team in all of their cases, including on corruption, abuse of power and money laundering. – Bernama, July 13, 2020.