Senior lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah said the Malaysian Bar had nothing to do with the investigation into the political donation.

He cited England’s judicial review system, where victims may apply for a judicial review on the decision of cases and counsel may be appointed to decide if matters can be reopened in court.

It is the same in Malaysia where ultimately it is up to the director of public prosecutions to decide, he added.

The Malaysian Bar initiated legal action on Wednesday to seek a judicial review of Attorney-General Apandi Ali’s decision to clear Prime Minister Najib Razak over the RM2.6 billion political donation deposited in Najib’s bank accounts.

“You can put up whatever application you want but the victim must initiate it in court. The Bar Council is not the victim. They have no locus standi.

“They may be seen as busybodies. The Bar Council getting the judicial review… I have my doubts,” Shafee told reporters at the Parliament lobby today.

Due to that, Shafee viewed the judicial review as “tampering with the discretion” given to the Attorney-General under the Constitution.

He also raised the issue of the Opposition trying to dig for information through a judicial review from Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

“The MACC obligation is to provide details to the AG, not anyone else,” he said, adding that the Bar was acting like an Opposition party instead of being non-partisan.

“The Bar Council has become so political. We don’t care whether they support the government or the Opposition, but they can’t do either. They have to remain non-partisan.”