AG no immunity from power abuse lawsuits, court decides
The Malay Mail Online – 5 hours agoRELATED CONTENT
- AG no immunity from power abuse lawsuits, court decides
KUALA LUMPUR, April 11 — A High Court here dismissed Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail’s attempt today to strike out two multi-million ringgit cases citing him for abuse of power and misconduct, telling the country’s top lawyer and other prosecutors that they do not have “absolute immunity” from lawsuits.
Judicial Commissioner Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera said that a civil servant who holds public office cannot escape lawsuits when it involves power abuse allegations.
“I am afraid that the notion of absolute immunity for a public servant, even when mala fide or abuse of power in the exercise of their prosecutorial power is alleged in the pleadings, is anathema to the modern-day notions of accountability,” Vazeer said when delivering his decision this morning.
Last November, Abdul Gani (picture) was sued along with a list of other defendants in two separate cases by former top police officer Datuk Ramli Yusuff and senior lawyer Rosli Dahlan for alleged malicious prosecution, among other things.
Ramli had filed the lawsuit against Abdul Gani and 11 others on November 1 last year, claiming at least RM128 million in damages for alleged malicious and false investigation and maliciously bringing him to court over alleged graft. He has since been acquitted of all charges against him.
Rosli had sued Abdul Gani and 10 others last November 22, claiming over RM47 million for conspiring to arrest and charge him in court over an alleged failure to declare his assets. Rosli has also been acquitted of all charges against him.
Both cases will now proceed for hearing, with Vazeer fixing June 18 for case management.
When met after the decision, Rosli said that public authorities who abuse their powers have been “insulated” from prosecution for “far too long” by using the Public Authorities Protection Act 1948.
“Today a brave judge has declared that absolute prosecutorial immunity is anathema to the modern concept of democracy. That is a powerful statement to remind public authorities of the duty of accountability,” he told reporters at the court complex here.
Ramli, a former commercial crime investigation department (CCID) chief, agreed that the judge had shown courage in striking out the applications by all the defendants.
“I’m doing this not for Ramli Yusuff, but for the Royal Malaysian Police Force and to protect senior government officers from being victimised,” the retired policeman said when met here.
In dismissing the bid to strike out Ramli’s case this morning, Vazeer had also said that the lawsuit was brought within the time limit.
He also ruled that the 10th defendant — the Royal Malaysian Police Force — was not a legal entity, but allowed Ramli’s lawyer to make amendments and replace it with the Inspector-General of Police (IGP).
Although the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was not in existence during the events mentioned in the lawsuit, Vazeer said the MACC could be sued in place of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) it replaced in 2009.
Vazeer applied the same reason to Rosli’s case, where the latter had sued the MACC, the current MACC chief Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed, other MACC officers, the police force, the former IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan and the government.
In his suit, Ramli had similarly named Musa, MACC and a few MACC officers, a police officer and the government.
Harvinderjit Singh represented Ramli, while Rosli’s lawyers were Chetan Jethwani and Pravinder Kaur Cheema.
Rishwant Singh appeared today for the defendants, but it is understood that senior lawyer Tan Sri Cecil Abraham and senior federal counsel Amarjeet Singh are also acting as their lawyers.
