![[UPDATED] High Court dismisses Najib's ex-lawyers' suit against Malaysian Bar](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fimages%2Farticles%2Fcourt_hammer1_1748515292.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
[UPDATED] High Court dismisses Najib's ex-lawyers' suit against Malaysian Bar
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian Bar's statement criticising Datuk Seri Najib Razak's former legal team over their handling of his final SRC International appeal at the Federal Court did not amount to defamation, the High Court heard.
Judge Roz Mawar Rozain made the ruling before dismissing a defamation suit filed by senior lawyer Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim and two others against the Bar and its former president, Karen Cheah Yee Lynn.
Zaid, along with Liew Teck Huat and Reuben Mathiavaranam, had represented the former prime minister in his final appeal at the Federal Court in August 2022, replacing Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.
The trio filed the suit over Cheah's media statement titled "Abuse of Process Brings Disrepute to Our Justice System", issued on Aug 9 that year, claiming it had tarnished their reputations.
In her ruling, Roz Mawar said the plaintiffs failed to establish that the words, in their natural and ordinary meaning, were defamatory in law.
She said the reputational impact of the plaintiffs' conduct had already crystallised prior to the publication, due to their public statements and the unfolding events at the Federal Court.
"The plaintiffs themselves had, prior to the publication, made multiple public disclosures including press interviews, social media postings, and commentaries admitting their lack of readiness, criticising prior counsel, and seeking adjournments which were ultimately refused by the apex court.
"Their reputational position had already been shaped by facts in the public domain.
"The impugned statements in the press release did not further lower or injure their standing in the eyes of reasonable members of society," she said.
Roz Mawar said the plaintiffs' claim of conspiracy to injure also failed, as there was no evidence of any agreement or concerted effort by the defendants to cause harm.
"No evidence was adduced to establish a concerted agreement between the defendants.
"If the complaint is based on a publication said to be defamatory, a separate claim of conspiracy cannot stand on its own," she said," she said, adding that the plaintiffs' claim for breach of statutory duty also had no merit.
The court said Cheah, who was then the Bar president, had acted within her statutory remit under Section 42(1)(d) of the Legal Profession Act in making public comments on matters of concern to the legal profession.
"There is no actionable breach, and no specific compensable loss was proven to have flowed from the alleged breach," she added.
Najib, on July 25, 2022, appointed Zaid's law firm to replace Shafee & Co in the final appeal of the SRC International case at the Federal Court, with Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik as lead counsel in place of Shafee.
However, the apex court on Aug 23 upheld the conviction and sentence of 12 years' imprisonment and a RM210 million fine imposed on Najib, who was found guilty of embezzling RM42 million in funds belonging to SRC International Sdn Bhd.
Najib's sentence was later reduced to six years, and the fine lowered to RM50 million, following his petition for a royal pardon on Sept 2, 2022.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Star
7 hours ago
- The Star
Outrage over Leissner's ‘inadequate' sentence in 1MDB case
PETALING JAYA: Widespread criticism has emerged over the two-year sentence imposed on former Goldman Sachs banker Tim Leissner for his role in the 1MDB scandal, with many arguing it fails to reflect the gravity of the crime. Malaysian Bar president Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab described the punishment as inadequate and warned of its broader implications for justice and deterrence. He said while the Bar respects the independence of the US judiciary and acknowledges the court's characterisation of Leissner's actions as 'brazen and audacious,' many Malaysians reasonably view the sentence as insufficient given the scale of the wrongdoing. 'An apology cannot undo the damage. Justice in cases of this magnitude must reflect not only accountability but also deterrence. 'Lenient outcomes risk eroding public confidence and failing to prevent future abuses of financial systems,' he said when contacted yesterday. Leissner, formerly Goldman Sachs' South-East Asia chairman, had pleaded guilty in 2018 to conspiring to violate the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and participating in a money laundering scheme. He later cooperated with US prosecutors, becoming a key witness in the conviction of his former colleague Roger Ng. Ng has pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiring to launder money and violate an anti-bribery law. Ng, the former head of investment banking for Goldman in Malaysia, was convicted in Brooklyn and sentenced to 10 years in prison, but had been brought here in 2023 to assist in investigations. Too short: Mohamad Ezri (left) and Johari were among those who expressed their disappointment. US-based journalist Tom Wright, who co-authored Billion Dollar Whale detailing the 1MDB saga, also criticised the sentence. In a post on X, Wright said the outcome 'is no justice' and argued that Leissner's cooperation in Ng's prosecution did not justify such a lenient term. 'That is punching down,' he wrote. In his newsletter Whale Hunting, Wright questioned whether justice had truly been served, especially in relation to Goldman Sachs' role in raising US$6.5bil in bonds for 1MDB, a fund set up by ex- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, with the help of fugitive financier Jho Low. 'Not by a long shot,' Wright remarked. Echoing similar concerns, Plantation and Commodities Minister Datuk Seri Johari Abdul Ghani, who chairs Malaysia's 1MDB asset recovery task force, described the sentence as 'too short.' Speaking to Reuters, he said: 'Considering he is one of the masterminds facilitating the 1MDB scandal, he should be given the maximum jail sentence.' Centre to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4) founding director Cynthia Gabriel also weighed in, describing the two-year sentence as 'a light slap on the wrist' that does not match the gravity of the financial crimes committed. Gabriel stressed that the scale of theft and money laundering, involving a leading financial institution like Goldman Sachs must not be taken lightly. The 1MDB scandal, which saw billions siphoned from the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund, triggered investigations across several jurisdictions and remains one of the largest financial scandals in global history.


The Star
19 hours ago
- The Star
PM not seeking immunity, says Anwar's political secretary
PETALING JAYA: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is not seeking absolute immunity for his office, says his senior political secretary Datuk Seri Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin. According to Shamsul, the crux of the issue was whether a civil suit can disrupt the Prime Minister's ability to carry out his duties as the executive branch of the nation. 'This is a valid and lawful consideration to be referred to the Federal Court, the highest judicial authority in the nation, with the jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution fairly and objectively. 'It is very irresponsible to equate this legal application with authoritarianism,' said Shamsul in a statement on Friday (May 30). Shamsul was referring to a statement by Lawyers for Liberty Director Zaid Malek, who called on the Attorney General Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar to intervene on the issue. This came after Anwar's court filing last week, which reportedly sought to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court, including whether he gets immunity from civil proceedings initiated by his former research assistant Yusoff Rawther. Shamsul said that in countries practising democracy, the issue of qualified immunity was always discussed to balance the need to administer the country and an individual's rights. 'The Prime Minister isn't above the law, but he should not be a target of politically-motivated legal proceedings, which could affect the stability of the country's administration,' added Shamsul. Shamsul urged the public to respect the rule of law and not abuse legal channels to craft their own political narrative. 'The nation has endured far too many episodes where the laws were manipulated for political interest. 'All disputes should be resolved via legal channels, not by manipulating the sentiments of the people,' he said. Yusoff had filed a civil suit against Anwar in 2021, accusing the prime minister of sexually assaulting him at his office in October 2018. Anwar is seeking a ruling from the courts on whether the Federal Constitution's Articles 39, 40, and 43 provide him with qualified immunity against the legal action brought by Yusoff.


Free Malaysia Today
20 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Shafee claims 7 letters sent to confirm Najib's addendum
Lawyer Shafee Abdullah said if no such addendum existed, there was no harm in replying his letters to that effect. KUALA LUMPUR : Lawyer Shafee Abdullah today claimed he had sent at least seven letters to individuals and institutions seeking to confirm the existence of the addendum in relation to former prime minister Najib Razak. He said none of the parties responded to his letters or acknowledged their receipt. 'We sent letters to former attorney-general Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh, the home minister (Saifuddin Nasution Ismail), the law and institutional reform minister (Azalina Othman Said), the prisons commissioner-general, and the government, and CC'd the prime minister and his deputy,' he said at a press conference today. He said if no such addendum existed, there was no harm in replying his letters to that effect. Najib obtained leave from the Court of Appeal to begin judicial review proceedings to enforce a royal decree so as to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest. However, proceedings have been suspended pending the disposal of the current attorney-general's appeal to the Federal Court. The Federal Territories Pardons Board announced on Feb 2 last year that Najib's prison sentence in his SRC International case had been halved from 12 years to six, and his fine reduced from RM210 million to RM50 million. On May 21, Najib filed an application to initiate contempt proceedings against Terrirudin. He claimed that Terrirudin, while serving as attorney-general, failed to reveal the former king's royal addendum allowing Najib to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest. However, the Attorney-General's Chambers said Najib's action was a direct breach of a court order regarding his judicial review and claims that Terrirudin tried to 'mislead' the court on the addendum had no basis. Shafee said that when a judicial review is filed, it is compulsory for the summoned party to be honest about their explanation and any document they have in hand. 'They cannot play hide-and-seek,' he said.