In an application filed in the High Court here, the party said the apex court must determine a question of law regarding the constitutionality of the investigation.
That question is whether MACC has authority and jurisdiction to investigate a serving superior court judge for breaching the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009 or presiding over a case despite a conflict of interest.
Senior assistant registrar Lee Kah Full fixed the application for case management on July 12.
Lim Wei Jiet appeared for Muda, while senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly appeared for MACC and the government.
Muda filed the suit last month seeking to declare as unlawful and unconstitutional the agency’s findings that Nazlan may have breached judicial ethics and acted in conflict of interest when presiding over Najib Razak’s SRC International trial in the High Court.
On Feb 23, law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said told the Dewan Rakyat that a report containing the findings had been submitted by MACC to Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat and copied to her.
In a letter dated April 6 to Najib’s solicitors, Shafee & Co, Azalina confirmed that MACC’s probe had concluded Nazlan may have breached ethics and had presided while under a conflict of interest.
She said MACC had identified “issues of wrongdoing” that the chief justice “needed to consider”.
On July 28, 2020, Nazlan convicted Najib on charges of abuse of power, criminal breach of trust and money laundering involving RM42 million belonging to SRC International, which had been deposited in the former prime minister’s bank accounts.
His conviction was affirmed by both the Court of Appeal in December 2021 and the Federal Court in August last year.
In March, Najib’s bid to have his conviction and sentence reviewed was turned down by a different panel of the Federal Court.
Last year, lawyers Haris Ibrahim, Nur Ain Mustapa and Sreekant Pillai filed a lawsuit against MACC questioning its investigations into Nazlan over claims of an unexplained sum of more than RM1 million in his bank account.
The trio said the probe violated the independence of the judiciary and the principle of separation of powers.
A seven-member Federal Court panel held that MACC’s investigation against Nazlan was done without following protocol.
Delivering the unanimous decision, Tengku Maimun said investigative bodies like MACC must consult the chief justice before initiating a probe.
“Their failure to inform shows that there was a lack of bona fide on their part.
“The announcement (made by MACC through the media) is enough to damage the judicial institution,” she said when delivering the court’s ruling.