Malaysia: Court dismisses ex-AG Tommy Thomas's bid to involve successor in lawsuit

The Malaysian government has successfully had a third-party notice filed by former Attorney-General Tan Sri Tommy Thomas set aside by the High Court. Thomas had sought to include his successor, Tan Sri Idrus Harun, as a third party in a defamation suit initiated against him by former Johor Bahru Member of Parliament Tan Sri Shahrir Ab Samad.

“

And I reiterate, this is because the fourth defendant (Government) did not deny that the first defendant (Tommy) had made the decision (to prosecute Shahrir) in his official capacity as the then Attorney-General, and there was no allegation that he acted with malice.

The legal action stems from a RM1 million check Shahrir received from former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak for housing project restoration. Shahrir filed the suit in 2023, naming Thomas, former MACC Chief Commissioner Latheefa Koya, the MACC, and the government as defendants, alleging malicious prosecution.

High Court Judge Gan Techiong stated that Thomas's constitutional rights were not affected by the absence of his successor as a third party. The judge explained that if Thomas is found liable to pay damages to Shahrir, the government, as the fourth defendant, would be vicariously responsible for any awarded sum. This is because the government did not deny that Thomas made the decision to prosecute Shahrir in his official capacity as Attorney-General at the time, and there was no allegation of malice.

“

Therefore, there is no basis for the first defendant to claim indemnity from a third party.

"Therefore, there is no basis for the first defendant (Thomas) to claim indemnity from a third party," the judge noted, adding that Shahrir had the prerogative not to name Idrus as a co-defendant. If Thomas believed Idrus needed to be present as a witness, he could apply for a subpoena. Thomas had previously denied Shahrir's claims of abuse of power during his tenure as Attorney-General from June 2018 to February 2020, calling them "unsupportable."

“

The plaintiff chose not to name Tan Sri Idrus as a co-defendant in this civil action, and that is the plaintiff's prerogative to determine who to sue.