Baljit Sidhu said it was unbecoming of Hamid Sultan Abu Backer to refuse to cooperate with the anti-graft investigators as the legal position was very clear.
“A dangerous precedent has been set when a witness refuses to cooperate with investigators once a report is lodged,” he told FMT.
Baljit said it was an offence to refuse to disclose information within one’s knowledge under Section 30 of the MACC Act and those found guilty could be fined up to RM10,000 or sentenced to a jail term of up to two years or both.
He was responding to a statement by Hamid’s lawyer that the judge was only prepared to tell everything about alleged judicial impropriety at a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI).
Lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla, who is representing Hamid, told reporters the judge could not reveal anything at the moment as it would implicate court registrars and other judges.
“He is prepared to reveal the contents of the affidavit only at an RCI,” Haniff told reporters yesterday after a five-man MACC team, led by deputy chief commissioner (operations) Azam Baki, met Hamid at his office for about an hour.
The Chief Registrar’s Office said on Friday that it filed a police report because the “sweeping contents” of the affidavit had tarnished the image of the judiciary.
It said the allegations could undermine public confidence in the institution and even have an adverse effect on the administration of justice.
Baljit, who is also a criminal law lecturer, also questioned why the MACC gave Hamid preferential treatment.
“They should have issued a notice and recorded his statement,” he said, adding what had transpired had made the MACC look like a “toothless tiger”.
He said nobody was above the law and Hamid should know this.
Another lawyer, Zainur Zakaria, said the entire incident had become a “circus” after Hamid made serious allegations against some of his fellow judges, including allegations of corrupt practice.
“Yet, he refuses to provide evidence to MACC and demands an RCI. It is not for the judge to make such demands.
“Having boldly made such allegations, he should have the courage to support his allegations and not question the integrity of MACC,” said Zainur, a former Malaysian Bar president.
Zainur said Haniff’s assertion that Hamid did not want to give a statement for fear of implicating court registrars and other judges was farcical because the judge had already implicated his fellow judges in the affidavit.
“In any event, if an RCI is set up, the judge will still have to back up his allegations by naming names,” he said, adding that if Hamid had the courage to accuse others, then he must face the consequences.
Hamid had affirmed the affidavit in support of legal action by lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo against the purported failure by Chief Justice Richard Malanjum to complete investigations into two cases of alleged judicial interference.