Lawyer Jagjit Singh said the “incriminating documents” were prepared by an individual, or more than one person, who had no authority.

“They appeared to be an outright draft judgment,” he said.

High Court judge Zaini Mazlan then asked Jagjit if he was “insinuating” that he would use the draft judgment leaked by fugitive blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin as his final judgment.

Jagjit said he did not mean so. “That is why we are saying there is a real danger of bias,” he said.

Rosmah is seeking to recuse Zaini from presiding over her case after a purported draft judgment was published by Raja Petra last week.

She claimed the draft judgment was not prepared by Zaini, but by “third parties”.

Rosmah also alleged that she had lost confidence in the judge to decide on her corruption case because of the draft judgment.

Earlier, ad hoc prosecutor Gopal Sri Ram told the court the purported draft judgment was not an attempt to influence the court.

He said it was merely the opinions of writers who were also judicial law clerks.

Sri Ram said Rosmah was relying on Raja Petra’s post in her bid to recuse Zaini, adding that the blogger was not a “credible” source.

“He is a fugitive from justice who lives in the UK and a rogue journalist. His views are altered according to how he is paid,” he said.

He also said that when he was serving as a Federal Court judge, then chief justice Zaki Azmi had offered to provide him a research officer to assist him.

However, he turned down the offer, adding that “each judge has their own way of doing things”.

“If the applicant (Rosmah) is troubled by this (draft judgment), she can address it in her petition of appeal,” he said.

Zaini told both the prosecution and defence the court will make a decision later this afternoon.

We are live on Telegram, subscribe here for breaking news and the latest announcements.