|COVID–19 NEWS||COVID : 30.4 pct of children in Malaysia fully vaccinated | N Korea reports one additional death amid COVID-19 outbreak | S Korea to resume issuing short-term travel visas, e-visas next month | Biden's daughter tests positive for COVID-19 | MPN recommends govt to come up with new initiatives to help tourism sector ||
KUALA LUMPUR, May 12 (Bernama) -- The High Court today set June 23 to hear an application by two lawyers and an activist to refer to the Federal Court two questions of law regarding the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigation against Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.
Judge Datuk Noorin Badaruddin set the date during case management attended by counsels A. Surendra Ananth and Wong Ming Yen, representing the three individuals and senior federal counsel Mazlifah Ayob, representing the defendants namely MACC Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki, MACC and the Malaysian government.
This is in reference to the originating summons filed by two lawyers, Nur Ain Mustapa and Sreekant Pillai and activist Haris Fathillah Mohamed Ibrahim to seek a declaration that the investigation conducted by MACC against Mohd Nazlan is unconstitutional.
The two questions are whether criminal investigation bodies including the MACC are only legally permitted to investigate High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court judges who have been suspended under Article 125 (5) of the Federal Constitution and whether the public prosecutor is empowered to institute or conduct any proceedings for an offence against serving judges pursuant to Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution.
Meanwhile, Mazlifah when met by reporters said that the defendants had been given until June 2 to file affidavits to respond to the suit.
Surendra said the court ordered both parties to file written submissions on or before June 22.
In a suit filed on May 6, the three plaintiffs are seeking to declare that the MACC was not entitled to investigate serving judges unless they have been suspended or removed.
They also seek a declaration that a public prosecutor is not empowered to institute or conduct any proceedings for an offence against serving judges of a court and that investigations against judge Mohd Nazlan were unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, the three plaintiffs through supporting affidavit filed with the originating summons said the media had reported that the commission had commenced a probe against Mohd Nazlan over allegations of unexplained money in his account following official reports lodged with it regarding the matter.
They claimed that the purported investigation is a violation by the Executive branch of the independence of the Judiciary and the separation of powers.
Recently, Mohd Nazlan, who heard and convicted former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak concerning charges of misappropriation of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds, lodged a police report over news articles alleging that he was being investigated for unexplained money in his bank account.
A statement released by the Federal Court chief registrar's office on April 21 said Mohd Nazlan denied the false, baseless and malicious allegations aimed at undermining his credibility as a judge and disrupt the administration of criminal justice and the judiciary.
Bernama is the trusted source of reliable real-time comprehensive and accurate news for both the public and media practitioners. Our news is published at www.bernama.com ; BERNAMA TV on: Astro Channel 502, unifi TV Channel 631, MYTV Channel 121 IFLIX; and Bernama Radio broadcasting locally on FM93.9 in Klang Valley, Johor (FM107.5), Kota Kinabalu (FM107.9) and Kuching (FM100.9).
Follow us on social media :
Facebook : @bernamaofficial, @bernamatv, @bernamaradio
Twitter : @bernama.com, @BernamaTV, @bernamaradio
Instagram : @bernamaofficial, @bernamatvofficial, @bernamaradioofficial
TikTok : @bernamaofficial