“(The special task force’s) establishment and existence was without any legal basis and would set a dangerous precedent, putting at risk the independence of the office of the AG, to the prejudice of (the) incumbent and future AGs of Malaysia,” he said.

Thomas said this to the task force in a letter dated Jan 5 this year.

“My participation and cooperation would legitimise them, and I would therefore not do so,” he added.

The former AG, who served when Pakatan Harapan was in power, made these claims in an affidavit filed in his lawsuit against the government and eight members of the task force.

Thomas also said he “refused to be judged by (his) peers,” noting that task force chairman Fong Ju Chung, a former Sarawak AG, ranked below him in the public service hierarchy, while two of its members were his juniors at the Bar.

Thomas’ affidavit further contends that the task force has no legal standing.

“(Its members) were not appointed under any written law (and it) is, therefore, an unlawful or illegal body. They are, therefore, personally liable for their acts, omissions and conduct,” he said.

“All purported actions, purported investigations, and other actions or steps taken by (the task force) are unsupported by any written law and are, therefore, illegal and void.”

As a result, the task force’s inquiry into his conduct, findings and recommendations were without legal basis and ultra vires, Thomas claimed.

He said the task force did not have the status of a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong pursuant to the Royal Commission of Inquiry Act 1950.

“In the procedures for an RCI, a person who is the subject of enquiry is entitled to be present, and represented by counsel, throughout the enquiry,” Thomas said.

Its enquiry process is, therefore “open and transparent”, unlike this “unlawful special task force”, which “had no power to require, direct or recommend the Public Prosecutor or investigating agencies to investigate possible offences,” he added.

Thomas is asking the High Court to declare the task force an unlawful body with no legal authority to perform the function assigned to it by the government.

He also wants a declaration that the report issued by the task force is an “illegal document” and “not authorised by law”.

He alleged that the publication of the report has damaged his reputation and violated his constitutional rights.

He also claims it offends Sections 499 (damage to reputation) and 500 (criminal defamation) of the Penal Code as well as Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (offensive content posted online).

Thomas’ book, “My Story: Justice in the Wilderness”, was published in January last year. It chronicles his early life, legal practice and stint as AG between June 2018 and February 2020.

Its controversial contents drew criticism from multiple quarters, including current AG Idrus Harun, lawyers, politicians and the general public, leading to the filing of numerous police reports.

On Oct 8 last year, the Cabinet established the task force to undertake a preliminary study of disclosures made by Thomas in the book.

The task force sat between Dec 23 last year and Aug 25.

On Sep 30, its report was issued and tabled before the Cabinet.

Shortly after that, the Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement that Thomas would be investigated for potential offences as identified in the report.

The report was then made public on Oct 21.