Judgment for PI’s widow in RM2 million suit defective in law, says senior lawyer

Altantuya Shaariibuu’s murder in 2006 has embroiled the prime minister and several high-profile individuals. A senior lawyer and his son now claim that a suit filed by a key witness in Altantuya’s murder trial is defective. – Al Jazeera pic, October 10, 2015.

Senior lawyer Tan Sri Cecil Abraham and his son Sunil have claimed that the Court of Appeal order restoring the suit brought by the widow of a key witness in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial is defective in law.

Their counsel, Rishwant Singh, in an October 5 letter to Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif said it was his duty as officer of the court to bring up the matter so that the mistake was rectified.
       
Rishwant held a watching brief for Cecil and Sunil on October 2 when the Court of Appeal restored the RM2 million suit brought by A. Santamil Selvi for losses suffered during the family’s five-year exile in India.  

Respondent, carpet dealer Deepak Jaikishan, who represented himself, told the judges that he wished to concede his stand on this case.

“The order should not be approved until the legal issue had been settled,” said Rishwant, who said he was representing Cecil and Sunil as respondents to the action.

Rishwant said the consent judgment given by the appellate court was tantamount to reversing the High Court ruling last December to strike out Santamil’s suit against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and seven others.

The Court of Appeal registry has fixed case management on October 15.

Santamil’s lawyer Americk Sidhu said he has written to the registry questioning the decision to hold a case management after a ruling on the case was made.

“Cecil and Sunil are not parties to the action in the Court of Appeal. The matter is between Santamil and Deepak,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

 Americk said he was unsure of their motive in sending the letter.

He said a trial would be held next year where Santamil and Deepak would give evidence.

In June last year, Santamil filed the suit on behalf of the estate of P. Balasubramaniam who died of heart attack on March 15, 2013 soon after his return overseas.

That suit would expose the roles of several people in sending Santamil’s family into exile following controversies surrounding two statutory declarations made by Balasubramaniam involving Altantuya and Najib.

This also included why Balasubramaniam was forced to retract his first sworn statement highlighting Najib’s involvement with Altantuya, and why Balasubramaniam and his family were forced to leave the country in 2008 for almost five years.

In December, High Court judge Datuk Hasnah Mohamed Hashim allowed an application by Najib, Rosmah, the prime minister’s brothers Datuk Johari and Datuk Nazim, Cecil, Sunil, commissioner for oaths Zainal Abidin Muhayat and lawyer M. Arulampalam to strike out the widow’s suit.

Hasnah said Santamil lacked the capacity to file for action on behalf of her husband’s estate and her pleadings were not according to law.

The Court of Appeal in April this year upheld the High Court decision on the grounds that Santamil’s notice of appeal was defective.
However, Deepak was not a respondent in Santamil’s appeal in the Court of Appeal.

Deepak had said he was not a voluntary party to strike out Santamil’s suit in the High Court.

In the suit, the family said the defendants, including Deepak, had caused Balasubramaniam’s second statutory declaration to be drafted without instructions from him and further caused him to sign it “under threat and inducement”.

Balasubramaniam and his family left Malaysia after he signed the second statutory declaration in 2008 to denounce the first one he made.

The second statement purported to clear the prime minister of involvement in the case.

Cecil was referred before the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary committee for professional misconduct over the drafting of the second statutory declaration.

- TMI