George’s article paints Tommy Thomas as the blame for what he calls a debacle. This ignores the fact he resigned on March 1, 2020 and there have been four attorney generals since his resignation – Engku Nor Faizah Engku Atek, Idrus Harun, Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Sallah, and the recent appointment of Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar.

The reason the case against former prime minister Najib Razak and former treasury head Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah for criminal breach of trust involving RM 6.6 billion in alleged payments to the International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC), owned by the Abu Dhabi government was struck out as a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) was due to the failure of the prosecutor to hand over discovery documents to the defence.

This is the responsibility to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) now, and not four years ago. The trial of the above case only started two years ago, as Najib and his lawyer had to defend the SRC case, which Najib was convicted beforehand. These cases could not be conducted at the same time as Najib must be physically present in the dock for each case he is facing.

The purported article by Philip George is below:

Tommy Thomas, the Malaysian Legal System, and the Collapse of Justice

As a solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales nearing five decades of practice, I am appalled by the incompetence and systemic failures in the country where I spent my formative years.

The recent debacle involving the DNAA (discharge not amounting to an acquittal) granted to former Prime Minister Najib Razak and former Treasury secretary-general Irwan Serigar Abdullah in the RM6.6 billion IPIC case is a damning indictment of Malaysia’s legal system.

This shameful episode reflects not only prosecutorial incompetence but also the entrenched rot of nepotism, corruption, and political bias that has derailed justice in Malaysia.

The Tommy Thomas Debacle

Tommy Thomas, hailed as a reformist attorney-general under Mahathir Mohamad’s fleeting second term, grossly mishandled the IPIC case. How could someone with such a critical role in Malaysia’s justice system bring charges without assembling a solid evidentiary foundation?

For six agonising years, the prosecution failed to produce the necessary documentary evidence, citing the absurd excuse that the documents were “not ready.” Such a glaring lack of preparedness is inexcusable and reflects the incompetence of not just Thomas but the prosecutorial arm of the Malaysian government. A System Designed to Fail The broader implications are even more troubling.

The repeated delays and postponements of high-profile cases like this demonstrate a judiciary in disarray. Cases are brought to court without proper investigation, leaving defendants—and the nation—in legal limbo. Judges, bound by procedural rules, are left to manage cases plagued by political interference, racial biases, and cronyism.

The DNAA ruling by Justice Jamil Hussin exposed the inordinate delays and prosecutorial misconduct. Yet, this is not an isolated case. It is symptomatic of a legal system where powerful individuals play games with the rule of law, weaponising it when convenient and abandoning it when it no longer serves their purposes.

The Bumiputra Bias

Another glaring issue is the Bumiputra bias ingrained in Malaysia’s governance and legal processes. Policies favouring one group have long stifled the country’s progress, embedding a sense of entitlement that permeates even the justice system. This systemic inequity fosters corruption and a culture where accountability is reserved for those outside the ruling elite’s favor.

Comparing Legal Systems: Malaysia and England Having practiced law in England and Wales, I cannot help but draw sharp contrasts. In the UK, the principle of innocent until proven guilty is safeguarded by rigorous pre-trial scrutiny.

Cases are not brought to court until the evidence is thoroughly examined and the prosecution is prepared to proceed. This commitment to due process ensures that defendants are not subjected to years of uncertainty, as seen in the IPIC case.

In Malaysia, however, incompetence is normalised, and justice is too often politicised. Prosecutorial overreach, bureaucratic inefficiency, and the influence of nepotism and corruption have made a mockery of the rule of law.

A Broken System Needs Reform Malaysia’s legal system needs an overhaul, beginning with holding individuals like Tommy Thomas accountable for their failures. His tenure as attorney-general exposed not only his lack of foresight but also the deeper malaise afflicting the justice system.

The IPIC case will stand as a cautionary tale for years to come—a stark reminder of what happens when justice is sacrificed for politics. I am left heartbroken to witness the decline of a country that shaped my early years. The Malaysia I knew had promise, but the one I see today has allowed incompetence, corruption, and bias to poison its institutions. For the sake of future generations, Malaysians must demand accountability and reform, or risk further erosion of their nation’s integrity.

29 November 2024

Philip GeorgeMy conclusion: If such logic is used by Philip George in the above article is similar to his own court work, I worry for the state of the legal profession today.This is a direct attack on Tommy Thomas and Gopal Sri Ram’s credibility, by someone who is pseudo-anonymous, or even non-existent.

In contrast, Ahmad Terrirudin and Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar have a lot to answer for. Were they incompetent, or were they directed by someone to conduct the prosecution in such a poor manner?