Who Did More Harm To Malaysia

---

 


The learned high court judge, Alice Loke Yee Ching, recently refused to grant leave for a convicted criminal - Najib Razak - to pursue a contempt proceeding against former attorney-general Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh for allegedly suppressing a copy of the royal addendum order.
In dismissing the bid, she, inter alia, held that Najib failed to establish any prima facie to warrant a leave, and she also outlined three reasons in fortifying her ruling, which included a finding that Najib’s contention to cite Terrirudin for contempt was merely based on speculation, wanting any cogent evidence.
The issue of the royal addendum first hit the nation when Najib’s lawyer revealed that his client - unlike other convicted criminals in Malaysia - was supposed to serve his remaining custodial sentence at home as per a royal addendum which accompanied the decision of the Pardon Boards under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution.
In applying to cite Terriruddin for contempt, Najib, among other things, canvassed this reason, i.e. Terriruddin had allegedly suppressed the order and in turn instructed federal counsels to object against his application for judicial review, where Najib sought the court’s intervention to issue a mandamus order compelling the government and six others to confirm the existence of the addendum.
Former attorney-general Ahmad Terrirudin SallehADSAnyway, in social media, some members in the legal fraternity seem to view the aforesaid issue by raising the following question: who actually did more harm to the nation? Najib or Terriruddin?
Arguments from both sides
To Najib’s die-hard supporters, they contended that the former AG actually did more harm to the nation by his perplexing action in dealing with the issue of the addendum.
They believed the former AG had no business at all to hide the very existence of the said addendum. They were even outraged to learn that despite such a controversy, the Madani government still dared to elevate Terrirudin as a federal court judge. Ergo, a bold and daring application to cite a federal court judge for contempt. Truth be told, it’s quite a history!
On the contrary, as far as Terrirudin’s sympathisers are concerned, they tend to believe Najib did more harm to the country by his confirmed involvement in the 1MDB saga, which rocked the nation and devastatingly ruined the country’s economy, apart from besmirching the good name of Malaysia.
They further argued that the scar and bleeding have not healed up to now, and Najib was unanimously convicted by nine judges - one in the High Court, three in the Court of Appeal, and five in the Federal Court- for his criminal case involving SRC International.
In addition to that, they also argued that Najib was even described via a judgment in the Court of Appeal as a “national embarrassment”! Therefore, they believed Najib should continue to be incarcerated in Kajang prison as he has been a “textbook case of an unremorseful corrupt political leader!”
Perhaps Malaysians should hold a referendum on this very issue. - Mkini
HANIPA MAIDIN is a former deputy minister of law.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---