YOURSAY | ‘Public interest demands a speedy and efficient disposal of cases.’

Najib’s new lawyers seek postponement of SRC appeal hearing

SRC appeal: Najib drops Shafee, appoint Zaid's firm

George Lourdesamy: What a blatant tactical manoeuvre on the part of the accused. The hearing date was fixed months ago. Why the change of lawyers at the eleventh hour when the appeal is fixed for hearing starting on Aug 15 for 10 days?

Why did the new lawyers agree to be appointed when they already would have known that they would have only about 20 days to prepare for the hearing at the Federal Court?

Not only is the request for the adjournment unprofessional and unethical, but it also amounts to gross abuse of process by the accused and his legal team.

Once hearing dates are fixed. parties must be ready to proceed on those dates even if there is a change of lawyers. Otherwise, there will be undue delays in the hearing and completion of cases.

Public interest demands speedy and efficient disposal of cases. It is also in the best interests of the accused, who is on bail and has criminal charges hanging over his head for such a long period of time.

The Federal Court should not countenance this apparently last-minute delaying tactic on the part of the defence.

Previously, an adjournment was sought because of the application to admit a Queen's Counsel to argue the appeal. That application was dismissed by the High Court and an appeal was filed.

Yesterday, a decision was taken to withdraw that appeal and instead there has been a change of lawyers by the accused.

Cumulatively, these acts point to bad faith and an intention to delay the trial for extraneous reasons possibly connected to the next general election.

If the Federal Court allows this adjournment, there is nothing to stop recalcitrant litigants and lawyers from employing similar tactics in future to force an adjournment of a hearing or trial for ulterior motives.

While justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done, it should not be at the expense of the public interest, the waste of public funds and precious judicial time.

Given the seriousness of the charges against the accused and the misuse of public funds amounting to millions of ringgit in SRC International, the balance of justice tilts in favour of refusing the request for the adjournment.

Twenty days is sufficient for the new lawyers to prepare for the appeal, which will be disposed of entirely based on the appeal records already filed in court.

Kawak: From the layperson's perspective, the change of solicitors appears to be another ploy to delay the hearing and final verdict.

There is no reason to change lawyers at this final stage. I hope the judiciary headed by the reputable chief justice and the others on the bench will make a fair and reasonable decision on this last-minute change of events.

Appum: You see, everyone here - in fact, the whole country - knows that this is nothing but a delaying tactic. How long are our judges going to be manipulated by such obvious tactics?

What if this group of new lawyers resign again on the eve of the hearing, and a new set is appointed, will there be another postponement? So how often will this merry-go-round continue?

This case has been going on for years and the court's time and expenses have been taken advantage of.

Let our judges courageously put their foot down and quickly resolve this serious matter once and for all. No more excuses for any postponements. Just go on as scheduled. It will be justice done to all.

Specialist Opening Batsman: Najib, can I advise you something? How long can you keep wriggling?

The recent damning judgment by High Court judge Azimah Omar in the Mohamed Apandi Ali vs Lim Kit Siang case must have sent a chill down your spine.

There was never any "fabled" Arab donor, was there?

Dr Raman Letchumanan: This is certainly a delay tactic. I hope the Federal Court won't be swayed. The new lawyers have 20 days to study the case.

At the Federal Court, they have to focus on points of law, no need to go through the facts of the case, and no need to whack judge Court of Appeal judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali and the Appeal Court judges.

So, what happened to the hotshot lawyer? I always thought Muhammad Shafee Abdullah was doing an Apandi, shooting himself in the foot.

Anyway, Shafee can prepare for his own trial. He better hire a QC early. I am sure this will be a novel case.

Vijay47: Recently, the Bar Council informed the court that there are about 20,000 lawyers in Malaysia. That prompted me to do some computing.

Taking a generous 20 lawyers to a firm, it would mean we have 1,000 legal firms. If each firm is appointed in turn to be former premier Najib Razak’s lawyers and it seeks a postponement of 10 days, that would mean further extension of 10,000 days.

This works out to 27 years three months and 24 days. For ease of calculation, I have omitted leap years, public holidays, spritely dogs, marriages of children, births of grandchildren, visits to Italy, and exposure to diphtheria, whooping cough, and elephantiasis.

Accordingly, I am going to take a short nap. Somebody, please wake me up on Nov 19, 2049 - 8.20am would be fine.

COMMENT | It’s been 2 years, Federal Court must dispense swift justice

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.