July 21 decision on UK lawyers's bid to represent Najib in final SRC appeal

Judge Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid set the date after hearing submissions from the prosecution and defence on an application by the former prime minister to allow Jonathan Laidlaw of the United Kingdom to represent him.

In submitting, the prosecution today asked how QC could effectively assist the Federal Court in the case when the lawyer did not attend the related hearings in the High Court and Court of Appeal.

Deputy public prosecutor Datuk V. Sithambaram said it was needless for Laidlaw to represent Najib in his final appeal in the SRC trial as Malaysian lawyers are able to deal with the novel and complex issues of the case.

"My Lord, the said criminal appeals do not involve novel or complex issues and in any event, those issues have been deliberated by the learned trial judge and affirmed by the Court of Appeal. He (Laidlaw) is a brilliant man, I'm not denying that but we don't need him here," he said.

"If only a foreign counsel could handle novel or complex issues, I think, in the future, Malaysians must run to England to get a QC. Surely, a foreign counsel like the appellant, lacking in local knowledge and not having handled the trial and appeal, would necessarily be disadvantaged in handling the appeals in the Federal Court," he said.

Sithambaram said that the application should not be allowed as if Laidlaw is permitted to represent Najib, he would still need to fly to Malaysia, read the case files, and only then can he make arguments.

"This would open the floodgates to similar applications in other court cases," he said.

The prosecutor pointed out that the applicant also failed to show that advocates and solicitors in Malaysia, especially Najib's current counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, or other senior criminal lawyers, lacked the qualifications and experience to conduct the said criminal appeals.

He further argued that the QC's assistance was not needed when compared to Muhammad Shafee, who argued for Najib when the trial was at the High Court and all the way through the initial appeal before the Court of Appeal.

Lawyer Harvinderjit Singh, representing Laidlaw, countered that the applicant is recognised as a specialist in business and financial crimes, and as such the applicant would also have unique qualifications and experience on matters of statutory construction, which he added would be relevant to the issues in the appeal.

Apart from the prosecution, the application was also objected by the Attorney-General's Chambers, the Malaysian Bar and the Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee by virtue of being the four respondents.

Earlier when proceedings began, Harvinderjit requested the court to adjourn today's hearing to tomorrow as Muhammad Shafee was unwell and could not attend court.

However, the four respondents objected to the adjournment and wanted the proceedings to proceed and Judge Ahmad Kamal then asked Harvinderjit to argue on behalf of Muhammad Shafee.

On May 31, Najib filed the application to allow the QC to represent him in the SRC appeal on several grounds, one of it being Laidlaw possesses special qualifications, experience and expertise which are not available among lawyers in Malaysia.

On April 29, the Federal Court set 10 days in August to hear Najib's appeal against his conviction and jail sentence for misappropriation of the company's funds.