[ad_1]
PETALING JAYA: The government said that Dr. Mahathir Mohamad played no role in the alleged “illegal termination” of Mohamed Apandi Ali as attorney general two years ago.
In response to Apandi’s RM 2.2 million lawsuit against Mahathir and the government, he said that any decision to terminate his contract as Malaysian legal advisor was made in accordance with the law.
“There was no abuse of power by the former prime minister (who is named as the first defendant) upon termination.
“We maintain that this claim is unfounded and that the plaintiff (Apandi) has no right to claim damages or declarations in court,” the government said.
Apandi filed the lawsuit last month, seeking a statement that Mahathir’s termination of his services in 2018 was illegal.
He is seeking RM 2,233,599.36 in special damages, punitive damages and general damages to be assessed by the court.
The government also denied Apandi’s claim that Mahathir committed an embezzlement tort through various actions, including making “biased” statements against Apandi, proposing Apandi’s replacement before Yang di-Pertuan Agong made the move. legal termination, and using “third parties” such as Mahathir’s personal lawyer to pressure Apandi to resign.
Apandi also claimed that Mahathir had formed a biased opinion of him and had decided on his dismissal regardless of the King’s power under the Federal Constitution.
“The defendant (Mahathir) had taken the actions with the intention of causing and / or inducing the breach of the contract,” he said, adding that the government was responsible for Mahathir’s actions and omissions.
Apandi, also a former judge, was appointed attorney general on July 27, 2015. His contract was to have ended on July 26, 2018.
He said the government’s chief secretary had informed him in a letter before the 14th general election that his term would be extended for three years.
However, he said, the chief secretary sent him a letter on June 5, 2018, informing him that the king had consented to the termination, but that he (the chief secretary) did not provide any approval documents from the ruler.
