KUALA LUMPUR (Aug 11): The High Court has set Aug 30 to deliver its decision on Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor's bid to challenge the appointment of Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram as lead prosecutor in her RM1.25 billion solar hybrid project graft trial, in an attempt to nullify her completed trial.
High Court judge Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid will deliver his decision via email after listening to submissions from all parties on Thursday (Aug 11).
In her judicial review application filed on June 24, the wife of former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak is seeking a declaration that her solar hybrid trial is null and void. The declaration is premised on the legality of Sri Ram's letter of appointment or "fiat".
The judge in solar hybrid trial, Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, is set to deliver his decision on Sept 1.
The Attorney General/Public Prosecutor, Government of Malaysia and Sri Ram, who are named as respondents in the matter, have raised preliminary objections to Rosmah's application seeking leave to commence judicial review proceedings.
In judicial review cases, leave or permission has to be granted for merits of the case to be heard.
Rosmah's similar application around the same issue had previously been dismissed by the Criminal High Court, the Court of Appeal (COA) and the Federal Court.
Contention if application is made within time
Earlier during submissions, which lasted slightly over two hours, Sri Ram argued that the Federal Court on May 27 had already affirmed an earlier High Court decision that his appointment was in order.
He added that the High Court had dismissed her earlier application in September last year based on merits of the application and that Rosmah's counsels are now seeking to review the High Court's decision which is vexatious and an abuse of court process.
"The High Court did not dismiss the application on the grounds that [the judge] had jurisdiction but based on merits [of the case]. They are now asking your lordship to review that decision.
"One High Court cannot issue a judicial review against another High Court [ruling]. The remedy of judicial review is confined to decisions made by inferior tributes," he argued.
He said that the very latest she could have filed a judicial application was three months after July 8, 2020 when she became aware of the fiats, but she did not do so.
Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan, representing the AG's Chambers, argued that the application was made out of time as a judicial review has to be made within three months when grounds for dissatisfaction first arise.
He argued that Rosmah should have filed her judicial review three months after she was charged in November 2018.
"In this regard, once they are out of time the court has no jurisdiction to hear the application," he said.
Rosmah's counsels — Datuk Jagjit Singh and Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kader — however contended that the application was made within time following the dismissal of the matter at the Federal Court.
Akberdin also contended that the merits of Rosmah's previous applications were not heard at the COA or the Federal Court but ruled based on the preliminary objections raised by Sri Ram.
"[Sri Ram] has been arguing that the application for nullity should be made in the civil courts. Suddenly, here they are arguing it is an abuse of process. They have to be consistent," he argued.