PUTRAJAYA: Lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah informed the Federal Court yesterday that his appointment to lead the prosecution’s appeal of the Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy case by the Attorney-General was valid and correct.
He urged the Apex Court to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeal (COA) which had dismissed Anwar’s application to disqualify him from acting further on the matter.
Muhammad Shafee, in his submission before the five-member bench yesterday, reiterated that a statement was recorded from him under Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code during investigation of the case, but he was neither called by the prosecution or defence as a witness.
The senior lawyer argued further that it was pure allegation and conjecture on the part of the appellent and his counsel Karpal Singh who argued that he was present at the same time with the main complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at the residence of then deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
“The issue of public perception on my presence there and 112 statements as contended by counsel, has no bearing at all to this case.”
“Where is the evidence that I’m a material witness in this case? It’s just conjecture, furthermore only being present at one corner of the house without knowing what’s happening at the other side,” argued Muhammad Shafee.
He told the bench headed by Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Md Raus Shariff that his appointment by Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail was correct and valid which was carried out according to the provisions of Section 376(3) and 379 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Four other bench members were Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Embong, Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop, Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin and Datuk Hasan Lah.
Meanwhile, Karpal told the Apex Court that the COA was wrong in not concluding the appointment of Muhammad Shafee was not valid and should be nulified.
“Section 378 of the CPC was clear in that only DPP’s in regular government service could appear on behalf of Public Prosecutor in criminal appeals.
“Appointments of advocates on ad hoc basis can now only be made under Section 379, but however the COA found that section (has) no relevance to the appointment of the lawyer in the appeal,” argued Karpal.
Karpal also asked the bench to consider on the failure of the COA for not concluding that Muhammad Shafee was a potential witness in the sodomy trial where he placed himself in a position of conflict in breach of the Legal Profession Rules, 1978.
Justice Md Raus set Nov 21 for the Federal Court to deliver its judgement on Anwar’s appeal.
On Sept 17, the Court of Appeal’s three-member panel comprising Federal Court judge Datuk Ramly Ali and Court of Appeal judges, Justice Rohana Yusuf and Datuk Mohd Zawawi Salleh had unanimously dismissed Anwar’s application to disqualify Muhammad Shafee. — Bernama