DATUK Seri Najib Abdul Razak yesterday (Aug 12) objected to the appointment of two lawyers from Messrs Tommy Thomas to represent former attorney-general Tan Sri Tommy Thomas in the former prime minister’s RM1.9 mil suit.
Lawyer Datuk Firoz Hussein Ahmad Jamaluddin, representing Najib, questioned whether Alan Adrian Gomez and Lai Wei Shiung would be able to maintain their professional independence and act objectively in the suit, which was filed on Oct 22 last year.
Firoz said Thomas, the first defendant in the suit, was a founder and consultant or partner of the legal firm while his partners also had financial interests in the firm.
“It is not appropriate for lawyers from the same firm to represent Thomas as this action will be viewed as unprofessional,” he said at the hearing of the objection before Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Datuk Ahmad Bache.
In response, Gomez told the court that the objection should be rejected because the plaintiff (Najib) needed to prove, through a supporting affidavit, that lawyers representing Thomas had financial interests and had failed to maintain their professionalism in court.
“Thomas is not a partner of Messrs Tommy Thomas,” Gomez added. “He is only a consultant and does not have financial interests in the legal firm.
“Thomas left the legal firm after he was appointed as attorney-general on June 4, 2018, and he then rejoined the firm as a consultant in September 2020,” he said.
Thomas resigned as attorney-general on Feb 28, 2020.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Ahmad fixed next Friday (Aug 19) to deliver his decision on the objection.
In the civil suit, Najib claimed that Thomas and the then Pakatan Harapan Government engaged in “malicious prosecution” by bringing forth criminal charges against him over the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) scandal.
The former finance minister also contends that the charges brought against him were part of a “long-planned, premeditated exercise”.
Both Thomas and the Government have since applied to strike out the suit on grounds that the Pekan MP’s legal action was “frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process”. – Aug 13, 2022
Main photo credit: Bernama
