ug环球官 guan[网‘wang’( objects to Najib using Queen\u2019s Counsel in SRC case《》「」

admin 1个月前 (07-05) 体育 17 1

  • 登录“lu”网(wang)址“zhi”、会员“yuan”登录网址、环球 qiu[UG会‘hui’员(yuan)注册《ce》、环“huan”球UG代理“li”开「kai」户‘hu’申请、环“huan”球(qiu)UG电脑 nao[客 ke[户 hu[端“duan”、环“huan”球UG手『shou』机『ji』版下载等业务〖wu〗。
  • ,Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Ashrof Adrin Kamarul says Queen's Counsel Jonathan Laidlow did not show any qualifications or special experience in the laws of this country apart from not being qualified in Bahasa Malaysia. – website pic, June 13, 2022.

    DEPUTY Public Prosecutor Mohd Ashrof Adrin Kamarul in an affidavit filed today objected to Queen’s Counsel of the United Kingdom Jonathan Laidlaw’s application to represent Najib Razak in the latter’s final appeal in the case involving the misappropriation of RM42 million belonging to SRC International Sdn Bhd.

    Mohd Ashrof said Laidlow did not show any qualifications or special experience in the laws of this country apart from not being qualified in Bahasa Malaysia.

    He claimed that the applicant (Laidlaw) also did not possess any more knowledge than a local lawyer to argue the appeal in the Federal Court.

    “It is difficult to understand how the applicant, who is foreign to the local laws can be said to be better equipped and qualified than senior counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who often appears before all levels of Malaysian courts to argue cases similar to the charges (in the SRC case),” said Mohd Ashrof.

    In his appeal in the Federal Court, Najib sought to quash his conviction and 12 -year jail sentence and a fine of RM210 million on one charge of abuse of position, three charges of breach of trust and three charges of money laundering linked to SRC International funds.

    Mohd Ashrof also claimed that Laidlaw did not have the Bahasa Malaysia qualifications required under subsection 11 (2) of the Legal Profession Act (Act 166) to be allowed an ad hoc application under Section 18 of the same Act.

    “The applicant is not a qualified person to be admitted as an ad hoc advocate and solicitor under Act 166.

    “I state that if the court ignores the political position of the appellant (Najib) in this appeal, the case will be like any other criminal appeal which does not deserve any special consideration to admit foreign lawyers to argue the appeal to be heard in the Federal Court,” he said.

    According to Mohd Ashrof, it is hard to accept that out of 21,625 advocates and solicitors in Malaysia, none have special qualifications or experience to handle the appeal apart from the applicant.

    “The fact that Muhammad Shafee has handled Najib’s trial in the Court of Appeal is a clear testament that the senior lawyer has special qualifications and experience to handle appeals related to the charges in the Federal Court. “The charge in the Federal Court is also not a new charge but the same charge handled by Muhammad Shafee in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Therefore, this application is without merit and must be rejected outright,” he said.


    • (*)



    • 文章总数:8064
    • 页面总数:0
    • 分类总数:8
    • 标签总数:2188
    • 评论总数:6544
    • 浏览总数:570431