Kenapa DAP Bersungguh-sungguh “Back-up” Maimun

Oleh Tun Teja

KESUNGGUHAN DAP menempelak serangan terhadap Ketua Hakim Negara Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat mengundang persoalan dikalangan rakyat. Sebagaimana yang kita tahu DAP merupakan parti yang sentiasa mengkritik kerajaan namun kini tindakan mereka tidak seperti kebiasaan parti tersebut. Adakah kerana mangsa dalam perkara ini merupakan Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak?

Mahkamah Persekutuan yang dipengurusikan Maimun menolak permohonan Datuk Seri Najib untuk mengemukakan bukti baru dalam kes rasuah SRC International berjumlah RM42 juta.

Kemudian pihak pembelaan meminta masa “tiga hingga empat bulan” agar mereka dapat menyediakan kes mereka namun mahkamah menolaknya dengan menegaskan pendengaran rayuan perlu diteruskan.

Apabila dua perkara ini ditolak oleh mahkamah, hampir seluruh rakyat Malaysia menyuarakan kemarahan mereka terhadap keputusan tersebut. Selebihnya dalam diam mereka menahan kemarahan tersebut.

Ironinya DAP tampil mempertahankan keputusan tersebut. Mungkin itulah satu-satunya peluang DAP menngalahkan Datuk Seri Najib memandangkan setiap isu fitnah dan tohmahan yang dilemparkan DAP ditangkis mudah dengan fakta yang lengkap oleh Datuk Seri Najib. Beliau merupakan ancaman utama DAP.

Keputusan Mahkamah tersebut sudah tentu mengecewakan Datuk Seri Najib. Memetik hantaran di Facebook beliau

STATEMENT TO MEDIA

Dato’ Sri Najib Hj Abd Razak

18.08.2022

I wish to record my objection in the strongest of terms of this appeal proceeding today where my rights to life, liberty and right to a fair hearing is at stake and that my counsel who had tried to discharge themselves because they are not able or willing to represent me anymore are still forced by the Federal Court to sit down in at the bar table on the purport that I am being represented.

Tn Hj Hisyam has multiple times stated that he is not prepared for this appeal means that I am necessarily left with no effective counsel or proper representation before this court in a complex appeal. This is because he has only been appointed less than a month ago for reasons I shall state below.

Due to this, Tn Hj Hisyam and team moved to discharge himself and the team from representing me at this appeal at the Federal Court as he is unable to meaningfully contribute to my case without the Federal Court granting an adjournment of three months.

However, the Federal Court refused to allow them to do so. In the current situation, is my responsibility to explain the circumstances that have brought us here.

My previous lawyers have done a stellar job over the past four years representing me in the High Court and Court of Appeal for this case which is why they remain my lawyers in the other trials I am facing. But notwithstanding this, I lost in both my trial and appeal to the Court of Appeal.

It is with this backdrop I felt that a fresh perspective at the case to bring in new ideas was warranted and necessary for my final appeal before this court. This involves my life, nothing less.

My initial plan was the engagement of Jonathan Laidlaw QC to come onboard with Shafee & Co. and to work together with Tan Sri Shafee and Harvey.

Jonathan came with the highest of recommendations and I was confident that he would be a positive contribution to the team.
The discovery of the evidence pertaining to Justice Nazlan further necessitated a new counsel to come onboard to independently look at the allegations and to submit before this Honourable Court in the most unbiased of circumstances.

Unfortunately, the High Court rejected Jonathan’s bid to come onboard as my lawyer.

With the High Court’s rejection and this appeal fixed around the corner I could not run the risk of Jonathan’s rejection being maintained at appeal leaving me with no additional counsel which by now I took the view was imperative to independently argue the issue regarding Justice Nazlan.

Datuk Zaid Ibrahim who had approached me some time back represented that he was able to bring in legal expertise from India through his Singaporean partner Niru Pillai.

I was then introduced to two senior counsel from India, who initially impressed me with their ideas. Ultimately, they were to do the back end work while Datuk Zaid’s firm facilitate the court process. Datuk Zaid and team came with a condition that their engagement must include his firm being placed as solicitor on record and a new local counsel come onboard.

I was also convinced that this was an appropriate decision after being told that other high profile appeals in the past were granted adjournments to in the spirit of due process and to facilitate an effective representation of an accused person.

My intention was not to simply delay the court process but rather because of Jonathan Laidlaw’s application was ultimately rejected less than a month before the scheduled dates – hence the need the sudden engagement of new counsel.

Any new team bringing in fresh ideas will need time. I am not ashamed to say, I was desperate, as would any litigant in my predicament.

I am now in a situation where my right to counsel and a fair hearing is illusory because I made a decision that I thought was in my bests interest at the time.

Berat sungguh ujian Datuk Seri Najib. Namun bertabahlah Datuk Seri.

Nabi Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam bersabda:
الْقُضَاةُ ثَلَاثَةٌ، اثْنَانِ فِي النَّارِ، وَوَاحِدٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ: رَجُلٌ عَلِمَ الْحَقَّ فَقَضَى بِهِ فَهُوَ فِي الْجَنَّةِ، وَرَجُلٌ قَضَى لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى جَهْلٍ فَهُوَ فِي النَّارِ، وَرَجُلٌ جَارَ فِي الْحُكْمِ فَهُوَ فِي النَّارِ

Hakim-hakim itu ada tiga, dua di neraka dan satu di surga : Seorang hakim yang mengetahui kebenaran, lalu dia memutuskan hukum dengan kebenaran, maka dia di surga; Seseorang (hakim) yang memutuskan hukum dengan kebodohan, maka dia di neraka; Dan seorang (hakim) yang menyimpang di dalam keputusan, maka dia di neraka.” (HR. Ibnu Majah, no. 2315; Tirmizi, no. 1322; Abu Dawud, no. 3573).

Sumber: Kitab Al Kabair

Datuk Seri Najib telah menyatakan bantahan terhadap prosiding rayuan di mana hak beliau untuk hidup, kebebasan dan hak untuk perbicaraan yang adil dipertaruhkan. Beliau kini berada dalam situasi di mana haknya untuk mendapatkan nasihat dan perbicaraan yang adil hanya satu ilusi kerana beliau membuat keputusan yang difikirkan terbaik pada masa itu. Namun DAP pula dilihat cuba mengambil kesempatan dalam situasi ini untuk “menghapuskan” pemimpin Barisan Nasional yang merupakan ancaman utama mereka.