CJ in bid to remove parts of affidavit in judicial interference suit

Lawyers Haniff Khatri Abdulla (left) and Joy Wilson Appukuttan, representing senior judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, outside the High Court today.

KUALA LUMPUR: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) is seeking to expunge parts of a senior judge’s affidavit in the lawsuit by the late Karpal Singh’s daughter.

Court of Appeal judge Hamid Sultan Abu Backer had claimed in his affidavit filed in support of Sangeet Kaur Deo’s case against the chief justice that the top judge failed to defend and preserve the judiciary.

Hamid alleged there were cases of judicial interference, including Karpal’s sedition case.

Lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla, representing Hamid, said the AGC, representing the chief justice, had informed the High Court that they were seeking to remove parts of the affidavit filed for Sangeet’s lawsuit.

“Co-counsel Joy Wilson Appukuttan and I are here for a watching brief on behalf of Hamid,” he said. “We need to take instructions from him.”

According to Haniff, the court set April 3 for mention pending any applications required, including on whether Hamid can intervene in Sangeet’s case.

Meanwhile, Sangeet said she had received the AGC’s bid to remove parts of Hamid’s affidavit, which was on grounds that it was based on hearsay and relevancy towards her case.

She said she would be writing to the AGC on the development of the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) promised by the government and when it would convene.

“We have not heard of any developments on the RCI and terms of references so far,” she added.

Sangeet filed the suit in January, seeking a court declaration that the chief justice had failed in his duty to preserve and protect the integrity of the judiciary.

She said current Chief Justice Richard Malanjum was duty-bound to investigate the two matters in her judicial interference claims.

Besides Karpal’s sedition case, Hamid had said in a forum that a judge interfered in the unilateral conversion case of M Indira Gandhi’s children.

Hamid also said he was “severely reprimanded” by that judge for his dissenting judgment in favour of Indira.

Malanjum previously said the internal probe on the judicial interference claims had been halted pending Karpal’s appeal in the Federal Court as well as police investigations.

He also said the probe could not be carried out as the three Court of Appeal judges who heard Karpal’s case were still serving.