KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian United Democratic Alliance (Muda) has failed to refer constitutional issues regarding the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission's (MACC) investigation into judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali to the Federal Court.
High Court judge Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid said the proposed question had become academic since MACC's view had been superseded by the top court's decision in Datuk Seri Najib Razak's case.
"Therefore, this court is of the opinion that the proposed questions should not be entertained by this court nor referred to the Federal Court under section 84 of Courts of Judicature Act 1964.
"In the meantime, the court is also of the opinion that the power to interpret constitutional provision is not exclusively given to the Apex Court.
"Under the constitutional scheme, the Federal Court is generally a court of last resort for all constitutional questions," he said.
Nazlan was the then High Court judge who convicted and sentenced Najib to 12 years' jail and a RM210 million fine for misappropriating RM42 millions of SRC International Bhd funds.
The party sought a declaration that the MACC's finding or view that Nazlan had breached the Judges' Code of Ethics or had a conflict of interest in presiding over Najib's SRC International case is unlawful and unconstitutional.
Muda filed the suit following Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said's letter to Najib's lawyers from Messrs Shafee & Co. last month.
In the letter dated March 20, 2023, Azalina confirmed that MACC in its investigation against Nazlan concluded that the latter had violated the Judges Code of Ethics when presiding over Najib's corruption charges involving the SRC International case.
On Feb 24, last year, Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat ruled that the MACC's investigation against Nazlan was done without following protocols.
The top judge also questioned the timing of the investigation, which was done on the eve of Najib's final appeal to overturn the 12-year jail sentence and RM210 million fine in the SRC International funds.
Tengku Maimun said even though investigative bodies were constitutionally entitled to investigate superior court judges, it must be exercised in good faith and only in genuine cases.
She said this in her ruling over an application to refer two constitutional questions relating to MACC's investigation against Nazlan by two lawyers and an activist.
The suit was filed by plaintiffs Nur Ain Mustapa, Sreekant Pillai and Haris Ibrahim on May 7, last year, who sought to declare that MACC was not entitled to investigate serving judges unless the latter had been suspended or removed.