Court Allows Malaysian Bar to Intervene in MACC Notice Appeal

PUTRAJAYA, July 17 — The Court of Appeal today allowed the Malaysian Bar to intervene in a lawyer’s appeal against a High Court decision dismissing his challenge against notices issued to him by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

Justice Datuk Azizul Azmi Adnan, who chaired the three-man bench, stated that the Bar’s function as the regulator of the legal profession places upon it a clear duty to protect and promote the interests of the profession. This statutory duty was ruled sufficient to clothe the Bar with a direct interest in the legal issues to be determined in the appeal.

The bench, which also comprised Justices Datin Paduka Evrol Mariette Peters and Aliza Sulaiman, fixed November 3 to formally hear the substantive appeal.

The legal battle stems from an appeal by lawyer Mahajoth Singh, who is challenging the High Court’s refusal to grant him leave to initiate judicial review proceedings. Mahajoth is contesting two notices issued to him by the anti-graft agency regarding his client, businessman Datuk Albert Tei Jiann Cheing, who was detained by the MACC on November 28 last year.

In his original judicial review application, Mahajoth sought a certiorari order to quash an “Attend an Examination” notice alongside another directive ordering him to hand over sensitive information and documents related to Tei in connection with ongoing MACC investigations.

Mahajoth argued that the MACC’s enforcement orders directly contravene statutory protections safeguarding privileged communication between a solicitor and a client, as explicitly provided under Section 126 of the Evidence Act 1950.

On January 29 this year, High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching dismissed Mahajoth’s leave application, ruling that the notices were part of the MACC’s standard investigative process and fell within the scope of its statutory powers.

During today’s appellate proceedings, Federal Counsel V. Krishna Priya, acting for the Attorney-General, objected to the intervention, arguing that the Malaysian Bar holds no direct interest in the subject matter of the dispute.

However, Malaysian Bar President and counsel Anand Raj countered the objection, submitting that the Bar must be allowed to intervene as the final outcome of the Court of Appeal’s ruling would significantly impact the entire legal profession. He stressed that the Bar, in its capacity as a regulator, is not a busybody but has a critical role to play in protecting institutional privileges.

Lawyer Amanda Sonia Mathew, representing Mahajoth, supported the Malaysian Bar’s application to join the suit.

-NMT