THE Bar Council can no longer stay silent over the investigation into Court of Appeal judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali over allegations of unexplained wealth in his bank account, legal experts said.

They told The Malaysian Insight that it is time for the Bar to act and send a strong message to the public, especially people who have been harping on the issue.

The country was recently rocked by the allegations of fugitive blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK) on his blog Malaysia Today, who wrote that Nazlan had received RM1 million in his Maybank account, allegedly from fugitive businessman and 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal mastermind Low Taek Jho.

Nazlan had countered the allegation by lodging a police report but the cops have not said if they have commenced an investigation into the judges report against the blog.

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), however, said it was investigating the judge after receiving several reports about his unexplained wealth.

Nazlan, who was elevated to the Court of Appeal in February, had in the Kuala Lumpur High Court found former prime minister Najib Razak guilty of corruption involving RM42 million of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds in July 2020. He also sentenced Najib to 12 years’ jail and a RM210 million fine.

Lawyer Lim Wei Jiat, of Messrs Sreneevasan Advocates and Solicitors, said the Bar should call for a rally like it did in 2007 to demand that then prime minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s government investigate accusations that a prominent lawyer had attempted to influence the appointment of judges.

Lim, who is also Muda vice-president, was commenting on an article by former ambassador Dennis Ignatius who urged the Bar to march in solidarity with Nazlan.

Ignatius in his article described the Bar’s reaction in Nazlan’s case so far as “disappointing” adding that it was “quibbling with words”.

Ignatius in a recent article urged the Bar to immediately organise another march to protest the slanderous allegations against the judiciary, as they did in September 2007 instead of merely issuing “a tepid and pro forma statement”.

“To BC’s (Bar Council) credit, they came out with a very strongly worded statement. But I do think the BC can do more. Let me just be forthright. I feel it’s time the BC rallies the lawyers for a march,” Lim told The Malaysian Insight.

“We cannot afford another judicial crisis like in 1988 and in 2007, and there is currently an obvious concerted effort to intimidate judges from functioning independently particularly in high profile cases involving Umno politicians.

“We must act now, and nip this in the bud,” stressed Lim.

March and road shows

Lawyer Syahredzan Johan said the Bar could also hold nationwide roadshows to send a strong message that the judiciary will not tolerate any more interference and intimidation.

Syahredzan said what happened to Nazlan appears to be a coordinated attempt to damage his reputation and raise questions about his integrity.

He, however, said he has full faith with the office bearers of the Bar to know whether there should be a Walk for Justice.

“It (complaint against Nazlan) is perhaps linked to his judgment in the SRC case.

“At the same time, it could also be an attempt to intimidate other judges who are presiding over other high profile cases, to reach favourable decisions for certain individuals.

“This is why many are up in arms about what has happened (to Nazlan),” Syahredzan said.

The lawyer, who is DAP National Social Media Bureau chairman and political secretary to party veteran Lim Kit Siang, said at this moment, he felt many are of the opinion that the Bar should organise the walk.

“Personally, I think we are very close to the tipping point, but it may be prudent to see how things pan out. If there is, I am most certainly ready,” said the constitutional expert.

“If the Bar decides that it is not yet time, I would strongly urge the Bar to hold roadshows instead. It can share the experiences of past rallies to the younger generation of lawyers. This would prepare the ground for any protest that may happen and at the same time send a strong message to certain individuals.

On Wednesday, Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat said that while judges were open to criticism, especially with regard to high-profile cases, the recent attacks were too much.

Tengku Maimun was accused of agreeing to interfere in the court cases of Najib and Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.  The office of the chief registrar of the Federal Court has lodged a police report denying the allegation.

In response to Tengku Maimun, MACC yesterday said it has the power to probe “public body officers”, following public criticism of its investigation into Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

In a statement, the MACC said it is its duty to probe into reports or complaints about matters under its jurisdiction.

The statement said that public body officer means any person who receives any remuneration from public money, including a member, officer, employee or servant of a public body, a member of the administration, a member of parliament, a member of a state assembly and a judge of the High Court, Court of Appeal or Federal Court.

Former Bar Council president Khutubul Zaman Bukhari said he fully backed Ignatius’ call for the Bar to hit the streets and protest.

He said following the recent “attacks” on the judiciary, the Bar could not stay silent.

“I completely agree with Ignatius. The time has come for the Bar to protest against the baseless accusations thrown against judges and the judiciary,” said Khutubul, a senior lawyer at Messrs Zaman and Associates.

Previously, PKR president Anwar Ibrahim and the Malaysian Bar were among those who called for the probe on Nazlan to be stopped, saying the judiciary has its own mechanism to monitor and investigate the integrity of judges.

Malaysian Bar president Karen Cheah said the MACC probe, which stemmed from an unverified blog post, undermined judicial independence and the rule of law.

Cheah said it created a climate of fear and intimidation for the judiciary. – April 29, 2022.