KUALA LUMPUR: Former attorney-general (A-G) Tan Sri Tommy Thomas is not immune to prosecution, especially if it involves alleged abuse of power during his tenure.
As pressure mounted for focus to be given on the supposed contentious aspects of the special task force report, observers called for deputy public prosecutors to decide on whether they needed to proceed with prosecutions.
Legal expert Professor Dr Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmood said the onus was now on the deputy public prosecutors to see through the case and decide on the legal recourse against those who were in the wrong.
When speaking to the New Sunday Times, he said police had investigated the case, so it was only natural for the next course of action to be meted out, if there was a case.
Nik Kamal, however, disagreed that the authorities should go as far as setting up a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) to investigate Thomas's allegations.
He said an RCI was only for high-profile probes into a specific subject.
"An RCI usually focuses on one issue. Therefore, an RCI that covers so many issues would not be suitable.
"The misconducts (alleged by Thomas) not only covered decisions made on the appointment of judges, it also involved the Equanimity (the luxury yacht linked to fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho) and appointment of lawyers.
"An RCI is not suitable. Perhaps an RCI could be done in the future on the extent of an A-G's power , but not on this case."
Meanwhile, lawyer Nizam Bashir Abdul Kariem Bashir said parties who had their rights violated due to the allegations made in the memoir needed to seek legal redress.
"But such action must be balanced against the principle that a special task force should not act as a lobby group or used to pursue the partisan interest of an individual or individuals in that task force," said Nizam Bashir.
A former A-G, who declined to be named, said while the constitution dictated that A-Gs had absolute power to institute charges and prosecute anyone who had acted against the law, they were not immune to prosecution.
"The constitution gives him the power to do so provided there is sufficient evidence and application of the law. This absolute power, however, cannot be seen as something that can be used as per one's whims and fancies.
"Right now, it is up to the A-G to decide whether he wants the deputy public prosecutors to take action or otherwise," he said.
Federal police secretary Datuk Noorsiah Mohd Saaduddin had recently said a revised version of the investigation paper into allegations made by Thomas's memoir was referred to the A-G's Chambers on Oct 3 for instructions.
Umno information chief Shahril Sufian Hamdan said the findings had unearthed the Pakatan Harapan governnment's misconduct when it was in power.
"The appointment of the persons to the highest judicial offices in July 2018 was privately agreed by the then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Thomas, in which the names differed from the names selected by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC)."
He said the move taken by them had contradicted the provisions of JAC Act, in which the prime minister has no power to select candidates for the appointment of judges of the superior courts.
Shahril said by right, the names presented to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong must be based on the recommendations by JAC.
"This is not a question of the integrity of judges appointed in 2018, and it is far from questioning the legitimacy of the appointment by the king.
"PH had been championing on improving governance, reducing the probability of abuse of power and interference in the judiciary."