YOURSAY | Najib is author of his own misfortune

YOURSAY | ‘Preferential treatment was seen to have been accorded to him…’

Did the courts bend over backwards for Najib?

Dr Raman Letchumanan: Former Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's lawyer "Hisyam (Teh Po Teik) had informed the bench that Najib's legal team would rely on written and oral arguments mounted by his previous legal team - headed by Muhammad Shafee Abdullah - when the appeal was before the Court of Appeal."

Let’s recap - this meant Najib's (appellant) lawyers agreed they had already submitted and presented their written and oral submission to the Federal Court for consideration, by their own admission. The only consideration was whether Hisham would take the opportunity to make an oral submission as offered by the Federal Court before its judges. No lawyer would pass on such an opportunity to defend their client to the fullest.

Instead, the appellant was refusing to speak. The court had to give the floor to the respondent (deputy public prosecutor) to submit, even though the rules provide the appellant should submit first. Never mind the reason they were not ready and needed more time. The court had ruled; they could not use that to blame the court, and being recalcitrant and obstinate.

They, in fact, repeated what was said in the Court of Appeal. Why let the Federal Court pour over the voluminous documents submitted at the Court of Appeal, which they are bound to do so, having denied the opportunity given? Didn’t the appellant have even one point in fact or law to create a reasonable doubt, but instead he would depend on earlier submissions to which lower courts had already decided against?

The grave implication is the appellant himself is undermining a review of the decision by the Federal Court, and/or a royal pardon. A person who pleads guilty voluntarily or refuses to defend himself cannot then accuse he is wronged.

If my lawyer behaves thus, I would tell the court I am representing myself and make use of the full four remaining days set aside by the Federal Court for the hearing. After all, this is no ordinary person, the topmost leader of the country and had been broadcasting and arguing on social media why he was innocent and had been fixed up. But when the real opportunity arose, he zipped up.

Way To Go: Great questions by James Chin and P Gunasegaram and great answers by former attorney-general Tommy Thomas.

It is indeed news that it is the Bar Council that stands in the way of reforming the court process and expediting the trials. This is made worse by lawyers indulging in matters other than legal practice, such as in politics and business at the expense of their profession.

The clients are the biggest losers as their matter keeps dragging on not of their own making. It is because of this that many victims avoid ligation and suffer in silence. They avoid getting entangled with lawyers unless it is a necessity like accident, housing and loan matters.

And coming to the suicidal and kamikaze stunts of the defence at the Federal Court, Thomas has taken the words out of our mouths in his view that it was self-inflicted or self-induced, and that they were authors of their own misfortune. It was a disgusting and blatant abuse of due process, perhaps a first in our legal annals and possibly in the Commonwealth.

But who is to blame? The defendant or his lawyers?

Even if it was part of the defendant's grand design to vent his personal frustration at the bench, was it ethical of his lawyers to go along with the sham and make a mockery of the courts? Isn't it the foremost duty of the defence to protect their client? Will the lawyers be called to account for their breach of professional conduct?

If this matter is not addressed, it will be a travesty of justice. More so, they are now openly campaigning that Najib was denied a fair trial.

Appum: The pertinent point that Thomas pointed out was the structural weakness of easy postponement of cases in our courts. He identified the weakness and problems derived from the lawyers and the judges who easily accept such behaviour.

We couldn't agree more with Thomas.

If you are involved or study our court cases, you will notice that they take a long time to conclude, sometimes years, for judgment to be eventually delivered. There is a serious need to look into such structural weaknesses in our court system. There should be a guided fixed timeline for all kinds of cases, be they civil or criminal.

Another change we need to look into is: once the person is sentenced to jail at whatever level of the courts, he should be sent straight to jail and if he can afford to appeal then allow him to appeal whilst spending time in jail.

The circus and mockery of a criminal going freely in public and enjoying life like nothing has happened to him, worst still promoting and instigating followers, is unbearable.

Such action can only be done by the rich and powerful because the fees to employ lawyers and court fees for Court of Appeal and Federal Courts are very high and out of reach to many laypeople.

MarioT: Preferential treatment was seen to have been accorded to Najib with the release of his passport for his daughter's childbirth in Singapore. Since his conviction and while his case was under appeal, he was given unrestricted movement with a police outrider around the country, conducting interviews and delivering speeches as it pleases him.

He has already stolen and squandered a substantial amount of our money and yet portrays himself as if nothing has happened. If this is not termed a two-tier system, then I do not know what it is.

GalaxyM: The nation 65 years after Merdeka should not be held ransom by racial and religious sentiments of a large portion of the populace.

Looking back since Merdeka, the country is backward and divided because of Umno and BN abusing the two issues, or maybe three including royalty.

We the humble rakyat have lived through the period wish our country will be ruled by wise and righteous politicians starting GE15 so that a new Malaysia for all races and religions will come into being.

But is it possible?

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. In the past year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.