KUALA LUMPUR, March 4 — Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor has officially exhausted all available legal avenues to press the “reset” button on her high-stakes solar bribery trial, having failed in her final bid to recuse the judge who ultimately convicted her.

To understand why the wife of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak faced repeated rejections across all three tiers of the judiciary, Malay Mail has compiled a comprehensive breakdown of her legal manoeuvrers and the judicial reasoning behind her defeats.

What is this solar bribery case about?

At the heart of the controversy is a high-profile corruption trial where Rosmah faced three charges.

She was accused of soliciting RM187.5 million and receiving RM6.5 million in bribes in exchange for helping a company secure a RM1.25 billion government contract to supply electricity to 369 rural schools in Sarawak.

The recusal bid: What Rosmah wanted

The drama unfolded just before the High Court was scheduled to deliver its decision on September 1, 2022.

On August 30 of that year, Rosmah filed an urgent application to remove then-High Court judge Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan from presiding over her case, effectively attempting to stop him from delivering his judgment.

Her demands were sweeping. Rosmah wanted:

• Zaini to recuse or withdraw himself from the trial and not make any decision;
• To temporarily pause any decision on whether she is guilty or not;
• To get a different High Court judge to hear the entire solar trial all over again.

Her sudden lack of faith in the judge stemmed from articles published by blogger, the late Raja Petra Kamarudin, on his Malaysia Today portal on August 26, 2022.

Based on those postings, Rosmah claimed that someone else had prepared draft judgments for the trial, leading her to doubt Zaini’s independence.

Strike one: The High Court

However, her attempts to change the judge failed at every level, beginning with Zaini himself.

On the day the decision was due, the judge dismissed her recusal application and firmly set the record straight regarding the allegedly leaked documents.

Zaini set the record straight on what Rosmah believed were leaked “draft judgments”:

• These documents were the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s Research Unit’s written opinions, and were actually “draft opinions and not even final opinions”.
• The draft opinions were not draft judgments prepared for Zaini;
• He did not give instructions for the draft opinions to be prepared;
• He did not rely on or use those draft opinions as a working draft for his judgment;
• He did not read the draft opinions.

Asserting his independence, Zaini said he had done his own research in the solar trial and makes his own decisions: “I always prepared and wrote judgments on my own.”

Zaini said he has “no prejudice” towards Rosmah or anyone else in his court, and that judges leave their personal feelings behind and only make decisions based on the facts and the law.

After saying no to removing himself, Zaini delivered his decision, convicting Rosmah and sentencing her to 10 years’ jail and a RM970 million fine.

In rejecting Rosmah’s recusal bid, Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan also said judges are not in court to be popular, but instead make decisions based on the law and the facts of the case. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa

Strike two: The Court of Appeal

Rosmah’s subsequent appeal met a similar fate.

On September 17, 2025, the Court of Appeal rejected her bid, ruling that she had failed to satisfy the necessary legal test of showing a “real danger of bias.”

Here’s what the Court of Appeal said in its 30-page judgment:

• Raja Petra’s credibility is dubious, and his articles were hearsay, unreliable and had no evidential value.
• There’s “obvious differences” between the alleged 71-page draft judgment and Zaini’s 119-page written judgment in solar case.
• This shows it’s true Zaini prepared his own decision without using any judgment prepared by others.
• Rosmah never applied during her 2.5 years of trial to recuse Zaini, but only applied to remove him “a few days before the decision date”.
• This proves Rosmah had not doubted Zaini’s fairness as a judge during the trial.

Strike three: The Federal Court

The final nail in the coffin for her recusal efforts came yesterday, when the Federal Court unanimously rejected her appeal.

The apex court agreed entirely with the Court of Appeal’s findings, concluding once again that Rosmah had failed to prove any “real danger of bias” and affirming that Zaini had authored his judgment without external reliance.

What happens next?

With her three attempts to secure a retrial fully exhausted, the legal proceedings will now move forward to the next phase.

The Court of Appeal is expected to proceed with fixing the hearing dates for the 74-year-old’s actual appeal against her September 2022 criminal conviction and sentence.

Because the solar bribery trial originated in the High Court, the appellate process will travel through the Court of Appeal before ultimately concluding at the Federal Court.

This remains the only active criminal case against Rosmah, following her previous acquittal in a separate money laundering and tax evasion trial.

Recommended reading:

• Rosmah applies to remove trial judge two days before bribery verdict to be known
• High Court finds Rosmah guilty of all three bribery charges
• Rosmah fails final bid to remove judge or get retrial, appellate court to hear solar bribery appeal over 10-year jail, RM970m fine 

 Malay Mail – Malaysia