FridayOL

PUTRAJAYA: A heated debate unfolded at the Court of Appeal as concerns were raised regarding a leaked draft judgment in the ongoing solar hybrid project graft case involving Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor. Lawyers representing Rosmah argued that the existence of the alleged draft suggests potential bias and undue influence within the Kuala Lumpur High Court's research division.

The core of the argument hinges on claims that the research division was specifically instructed to prepare the draft judgment. This, according to the defense, raises serious questions about the impartiality of the judicial process. The defense team contends that such actions undermine the integrity of the court and warrant a thorough investigation.

Background of the Case: The solar hybrid project case centers around allegations that Rosmah Mansor solicited and received bribes in exchange for approving a contract for rural schools to receive solar hybrid systems. The project, valued at RM1.25 billion, was intended to provide electricity to schools in rural Sabah and Sarawak. Rosmah has consistently denied all charges, claiming she was misled by her former aides.

The Leaked Draft and its Implications: The leaked draft, as presented by the defense, allegedly outlines a judgment finding Rosmah guilty. The defense argues that the very existence of such a document, potentially prepared before the completion of the trial, creates a perception of bias. They questioned how the research division could be drafting a judgment before all evidence had been presented and considered.

Court of Appeal's Response: The Court of Appeal is currently deliberating on whether to allow the defense to present further evidence regarding the leaked draft. The prosecution, on the other hand, has dismissed the claims as an attempt to distract from the merits of the case. They argue that the research division routinely prepares draft documents as part of their work and that this does not necessarily indicate any wrongdoing.

Legal Experts Weigh In: Legal experts have noted that the situation is unprecedented and could have significant implications for the judiciary. While the preparation of draft judgments is not inherently illegal, the timing and circumstances surrounding this particular case have raised eyebrows. Some experts suggest that a transparent investigation is necessary to restore public confidence in the judicial system.

Future Developments: The Court of Appeal's decision on whether to allow the defense to present further evidence will be crucial. Regardless of the outcome, the case has highlighted the importance of maintaining the perception of impartiality and fairness in the judicial process. The trial continues to draw significant public attention, and the outcome will undoubtedly have a lasting impact on Malaysian politics and the legal landscape.

The appeal hearing is expected to continue with further arguments from both sides. The Court of Appeal will ultimately decide whether to uphold Rosmah’s conviction or order a retrial.