Najib was seeking leave of the High Court to commence judicial review proceedings in a bid to compel the government to produce a “supplementary order”, purportedly issued by the former king, allowing him to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest.

Solicitors Shafee & Co said claims made in media reports that the proceedings, presided over by Justice Amerjeet Singh, were conducted in secret were entirely misplaced.

“(We) strongly advise critics to check the law before disparaging the parties, including the court, in this matter,” they said in a statement.

The lawyers said that under Order 53 Rule 3(2) of the Rules of Court 2012, an application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings “must” be made ex parte to a judge in chambers.

“The word ‘must’ suggests that this process is mandatory to be a chamber hearing with the public not invited to sit in. This also includes the applicant (Najib) himself, who was not present,” the statement added.

The solicitors said that since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, chamber matters were often conducted in open court, but this was purely to facilitate social distancing.

“Therefore, the request by counsel for the public to be excluded from the proceedings is 100% in line with the present rules of court,” they said.

The law firm’s statement was issued in the wake of media reports quoting various segments of civil society, including the Centre for Independent Journalism and several NGOs, calling for the proceedings to be heard publicly.

The lawyers, however, dismissed these comments as an attempt to rewrite or reinterpret the Rules of Court 2012.

The comments arose after Najib’s lead counsel Shafee Abdullah told the media he had informed Amarjeet at the start of proceedings of the potential sensitivity of the subject matter.

Shafee added that senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan and Ahmad Hanir Hambaly, appearing for the attorney-general, did not object to having the case heard in chambers.