High Court refuses to excuse Najib for Parliament, says MPs must still attend own trial

KUALA LUMPUR, July 1 — The High Court rejected an application this morning to adjourn Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s trial to allow him to attend Dewan Rakyat that is reconvening today.

Najib’s lawyer, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, earlier argued that his client must be in Parliament to vote on two Bills: one making it mandatory for all MPs to declare their assets and another to lower the voting age from 21 to 18.

High Court Judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali reminded the accused that he is facing serious criminal charges, adding that although Parliament will be in session for the next few weeks there was no certainty when voting on important Bills will take place as suggested by the defence.

“It is not a question of court obstructing the accused as MP from participating since he's not prevented from attending Dewan Rakyat whenever the court is not in session.

“The important point is that even though the accused is an MP, he is also an accused facing seven charges in this court. I therefore refuse the application for adjournment,” he said in his decision.

Nazlan announced the decision after considering arguments from both prosecution and the defence.

Earlier during submission, Muhammad Shafee contended that Najib has a duty to attend Parliament and pointed out that the defence had not asked for leave when Parliament is in session previously.

The lawyer also argued that the request was reasonable and Najib’s attendance in Parliament, critical.

“My client is an MP and he has a statutory duty to attend the Parliament session,” he said.

He said Najib wished to participate in the debate on the declaration of assets as he was familiar with the subject from his time as prime minister.

Najib, who is the Pekan MP, is on trial over seven charges of abuse of position, criminal breach of trust and money-laundering over RM42 million of SRC International’s funds.

The Dewan Rakyat convenes from today until July 18.

Muhammad Shafee said the debate could begin immediately after question time, and that a vote could be taken at any point.

“It is a controversial topic and could continue until midnight," he said, adding that amendments to the Federal Constitution would require the cooperation of all MPs as the government has no two-thirds majority of its own.

Attorney General Tommy Thomas also objected to the request, saying an adjournment application should be considered on a case-by-case basis and this was the price an MP who is accused of a criminal charge has to pay.

“When an accused is in court facing a criminal charge, the law must be treated the same way the lady of justice is blindfolded with her scales,” he said, adding that MPs should not be given special treatment.

Thomas then pointed out that the trial was already going “so slowly” despite being a case of national and public importance.

“What we have is three days this week, and for next week Friday is exempted. We do not have every day in July as hearing.

“With respect this is a poor reason. We have to give respect to the time given. Otherwise member of public will think why this trial is treated differently,” he said.

He also said the defence often claimed that Najib would quickly vindicate himself in court, but it now appeared that the defence was looking at every opportunity to adjourn the trial.

Thomas also suggested that Najib could attend Parliament after the trial ends for the day at 5pm as debates could continue until midnight.

The trial then resumed with the examination-in-chief of former SRC International Sdn Bhd director Datuk Suboh Md Yassin who is also the 42nd prosecution witness in Najib’s ongoing trial.