PETALING JAYA: There is nothing special about the probe into Court of Appeals Judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, says Isham Jalil (pic).

       The Selangor Barisan Nasional information chief said that all - including Mohd Nazlan - should be equal in the eyes of the law.

       "Isn't the law supposed to be blind to all in the matter of justice? Why is there a double standard," Isham said in a Facebook post on Saturday (May 7).

       Isham was responding to Datuk Shad Saleem Faruqi, who criticised the investigations on Mohd Nazlan in an opinion piece.

       The legal expert had said that the investigation into Mohd Nazlan is not conducive to the independence of the judiciary, law, and Constitution.

       Isham criticised Shad Saleem's citation of Article 125 of the Federal Constitution, saying he did not mention that the article did not specify any provisions on criminal offences by judges.

       He also said that Shad had failed to mention that though judges aren't members of the public service, they are subject to investigations as they are public officials.

       "You keep quoting Article 125 of the Constitution and the Judges' Ethic Committee Act 2010 which provide that in disciplinary cases, judges must be tried by a tribunal or committee consisting solely of fellow judges," said Isham.

       He added that Shad Saleem did not emphasize that Article 125 is about the tenure and remuneration of judges and how to shorten their tenure if they breach discipline and ethics.

       "Article 125 doesn't say anything about judges' criminal offences. If he (Mohd Nazlan) is guilty, not only will he be removed from office and have his tenure shortened, but he will go to jail as well," added Isham.

       The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) had on April 29 defended its decision to investigate Mohd Nazlan, saying that it has the authority to do so against any "officers of public bodies".

       In his opinion piece, Shad Saleem had argued that under the provisions of Article 125, any complaints against the judge for a breach of Code must be made in writing to the Chief Justice.

       Shad Saleem also said that the MACC probe into Mohd Nazlan raises Constitutional issues and judges of superior courts are not members of the public service under Article 132 of the Constitution.

       "Their discipline, suspension, and dismissal are not entirely in the executive's hands. The chief justice is closely involved in the process," said Shad.

       The MACC investigations came following claims by blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin, alleging that there were funds transferred to Mohd Nazlan's account during his time as the group general counsel and company secretary of Maybank.

       Azam had said the probe was launched by the MACC due to a report lodged against the matter.

       Mohd Nazlan lodged a police report against Raja Petra on April 21, denying the accusations which he said were malicious, baseless and aimed at tarnishing his credibility as a judge.

       He was the High Court judge who had sentenced former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak to 12 years jail and a RM210mil fine in July 2020 over the misappropriation of RM42mil of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds.