Court to hear Rosmah's bid to recuse judge today

KUALA LUMPUR - The High Court today will hear Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor's application to recuse the presiding judge first before delivering the decision on her corruption case.

Today was fixed for decision of the former prime minister's wife's case involving the RM1.25 billion solar hybrid energy project after a full trial.

However, on Tuesday, she filed a last minute application for the recusal of judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan.

This was on grounds of an alleged leaked judgment of her case, which was prepared by another party.

At the onset of the proceedings today, Rosmah's lawyer Datuk Jagjit Singh addressed the court regarding the eleventh hour application for the recusal, an interim stay of the proceedings pending the disposal of the application and for the entire trial to be heard before another judge.

He told the court that the applicant needed time to reply to the prosecution's affidavit in regards with the application which was filed this morning.

"I have not seen it (affidavit) yet.

"I seek the guidance of the court for a short adjournment to allow us to ventilate this (recusal) motion," he said.

Meanwhile, senior deputy public prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri said he was ready to argue on the application and opposed the adjournment sought by the defence.

He said the application has not produced any cogent evidence to support the accusation of bias in regards to the alleged leaked document.

The application, Sri Ram said was speculative and fanciful in nature.

"Even without the affidavit, I am able to argue (the application).

"I am ready to argue on their own application. You have to be ready for everything before you come to court.

"If they are not prepared to submit in the application, I will ask for the application to be dismissed. We oppose the application to adjourn the judgement and notice of motion," he said.

Zaini then asked Jagjit whose idea was it to file the recusal, to which the latter replied "we act on instruction."

The judge then pointed out that the notice of motion came together with a certificate of urgency with 15 grounds stating why the application should be heard expeditiously.

"In my court and in any court in the country where a certificate of urgency is filed, we tend to fix hearing of the application if not the same day, the next day.

"I have instructed my officers to prepare for the hearing today itself. If or whether I was due to deliver the decision of the trial, I would still fix it for hearing. That is the practice," he said.

Zaini then noted that the application pertained to an alleged judgment of his which was written by a third party.

"I think I would be the only one to answer that, don't you think so? " he said.

Zaini then ordered for the defence to submit the application today.

The court then went into a short recess to allow the defence to prepare their submissions.