High Court allows Muhyiddin's application to transfer abuse of power, money laundering case
Justice Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin granted the application after hearing submissions from Muhyiddin's counsel, Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, and deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin.
'I have considered the arguments from both parties and find that the applicant has met the threshold under Section 417(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code for the case to be transferred to the High Court. The three questions of law arising from the charges are of exceptional complexity.
'While I have full confidence in the Sessions Court judge's legal competence and ability to conduct the trial, it is more appropriate for the High Court to determine these legal issues,' the judge said.
The court then fixed July 14 for case management.
Earlier, Hisyam submitted that the application had satisfied the necessary threshold, and there were sufficient merits for the court to exercise its additional powers under Section 12 of the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.
'In the applicant's affidavit in support, (it is stated that) a number of critical questions of law of unusual difficulty are likely to arise in these criminal proceedings, and that for the ends of justice, the case should be transferred to and tried before the High Court,' he said.
Hisyam said the first legal issue is whether the learned Sessions Court judge may invoke both statutory presumptions against the applicant, or is limited to relying solely on the presumption under Sections 23(2) and 50(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act.
'The second issue is whether, in law, the monies allegedly received by Bersatu constitutes unacceptable gratifications or legitimate political donations, and the third legal issue is whether the word 'organisation' in the context of the MACC Act can be interpreted and construed to also include a political party like Bersatu,' he said.
Meanwhile, Wan Shaharuddin submitted that the prosecution had no doubts regarding the competence and capability of the Sessions Court judge to adjudicate all legal issues raised, including those advanced by Muhyiddin in the present application.
'The Sessions Court judge has served on the bench for over 13 years and has nearly three decades of experience in public service. The fact that the applicant is a former Prime Minister does not, by itself, entitle him to choose the court in which his case should be heard,' he said, appearing with DPP Wan Nur Iman Wan Ahmad Afzal.
Muhyiddin, 78, who was then Prime Minister and Bersatu president, was charged with four counts of abuse of power for allegedly soliciting RM232.5 million in bribes for the political party from Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, Nepturis Sdn Bhd, Mamfor Sdn Bhd, and Datuk Azman Yusoff in connection with the Jana Wibawa project.
He was accused of committing the offence at the Prime Minister's Office, Bangunan Perdana Putra, Federal Government Administration Centre in Putrajaya between March 1, 2020, and Aug 20, 2021.
The Pagoh member of parliament also faces three charges of receiving RM200 million in illegal proceeds from Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, which were deposited into Bersatu's Ambank and CIMB Bank accounts.
The offence was allegedly committed at AmBank, Amcorp Mall branch, Petaling Jaya on Jan 7, 2022, and CIMB Bank, Menara KL Branch, Jalan Stesen Sentral, between February 25 and July 16, 2021, and Feb 8 and July 8, 2022.
Meanwhile, speaking to reporters after the proceedings, Wan Shaharuddin said the prosecution will file an appeal against the decision by the High Court today.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
Open by default
WHEN the explosion and fire shook a residential area in Putra Heights, Selangor, in early April this year, residents were left not just with anxiety and trauma but also with lingering doubts. Even after the investigation by the Occupational Safety and Health Department – which was made public in June – revealed that ground instability was what led to the gas pipeline explosion, and the police subsequently classified the case as 'No Further Action', residents continue to grapple with unresolved questions, calling on the government to provide them with answers. Why did the explosion happen only there? What about the construction of shop lots near the pipeline's location? And why is it so difficult to access such information? Incidents like this reveal a deeper truth that access to information is not just a tool for journalists or watchdogs – it can affect the lives of everyday Malaysians too. This is one reason why advocates say it is important the government keeps its promise to table a Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill in Parliament soon. FOI supporters say the law could empower citizens in ways that extend far beyond politics and media; from holding the government accountable for safety and land use decisions, to improving services through smarter, more transparent data sharing. Changing the mindset Lawyer and former Selangor Bar chairman Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo says a federal FOI law would benefit ordinary citizens seeking information about government activities that directly affect them, including issues of environmental hazards, land use, and healthcare policies. She cites the example of a notable judgment in 2023 involving a High Court order that required the government to release an accident investigation report about a plane crash that killed 11 people almost half a century ago in 1976. 'This case illustrated how families struggled to access information without FOI provisions,' she says. But beyond that, she says it could also help so many segments of society, such as students and researchers wanting to carry out evidence-based analysis, small business owners who may need to investigate regulations and obtain contract information, or legal professionals looking to gain evidence or background for court cases. Kokila says in South Africa, for example, environmental groups and minority shareholders have used FOI laws to obtain critical information on corporate projects affecting their interests. 'FOI is recognised as a consumer right to enable informed choices,' Kokila says. State and culture The Malaysian public has a right to know how the government conducts activities that shape daily lives, stresses senior manager (research) for the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas), Alissa Rode. Because of the lack of an FOI law, she says only seven out of the 13 states and territories published their annual budget estimates online as of 2024. 'Expenditure information should be considered critical information that is proactively disclosed, but failing that, a minimal right to information would enable citizens to obtain this information,' she says. This also shows that it is important for an FOI law to be adopted by all states, not just at the federal level, she adds, as state governments also possess data that is important to the average citizen. Sinar Project coordinator Khairil Yusof points out that two states – Penang and Selangor – already have FOI laws at the state level. From their interactions with the two state governments, he says the implementation of an FOI law creates not only a legal change, but also a change in culture within the government from being the gatekeeper of information to an 'open by default' approach. 'The cultural change is the under-standing that government information and knowledge resources are publicly funded and that they should be freely available and accessible to the public. 'It also creates an enabling environment for government agencies to proactively share public information and data, not just with the public but also between government agencies,' says Khairil. In practice, existing laws and bureau-cracy often hinder this as government officials are prevented from sharing information with the public. There is a provision in the Penal Code, Section 203A, which Khairil describes as being 'very vague', that discourages civil servants from sharing information. Section 203A states that it is a crime for civil servants to disclose any information obtained by them in the performance of their duties under any written law. 'So often, even if the information requested is not secret, it requires a lot of additional work for both parties to share that information. 'For example, the cleanliness of rivers that the officer already had on their computer.' Indirect beneficiary Another main obstacle to information access in Malaysia is the Official Secrets Act (OSA), as Rode points out. The OSA makes all information confidential by default. 'Without an FOI law, a citizen seeking information would commonly get shunted around the bureaucracy looking for a sympathetic and empowered officer, as there is no obligation on the part of public officials to meet the request or even reveal who is responsible for that data. 'Even if the department in question is willing to provide the data, requests are often deprioritised,' she says. Kokila adds that without FOI protections, any whistleblower disclosing public interest information becomes at risk of prosecution and their disclosures often end up being suppressed by secrecy laws. Thus, Rode says, although an FOI law should at minimum mandate passive disclosure – that is, information is provided upon request – countries with the highest standards of transparency would go one step further and embrace active disclosure and an 'open by default' approach to information. 'Ideally, the upcoming FOI law should set up the expectation that critical information is made available online by default. Exceptions can still be made for security and privacy purposes, but such exceptions should be narrowly defined,' she says. Is there hope? Khairil says there are already examples in Malaysia of a more 'open by default' approach to data collected by the government, such as the Health Ministry's Covid-Now dashboard, the Department of Statistics's OpenDOSM portal, and the Public Sector Open Data initiatives. The results of such initiatives have shown that beyond governance and rights issues, an FOI law also immediately paves the way for an open government and unlocks the full value of the work done by the civil service by making public information open by default. 'It enables rapid digital transformation innovations not only for the governments, but for everyone,' says Khairil. But usually, the general public is an indirect beneficiary of access to information, mostly without realising it, he says, providing what he calls a relatable example: Local councils like the Petaling Jaya City Council and the Subang Jaya City Council do spot checks and grade restaurant cleanliness; the rating is displayed on the inspected premises. 'If this dataset were publicly available, then companies like Google, FoodPanda, or Grab could incorporate these grades in their apps.' To drive home the point of how much the people take the indirect benefits of open data for granted, Khairil points to a global example; the GPS system used worldwide is only possible because the United States government made it public. 'Imagine a world where only limited people could have access to GPS navigation.'
The Star
17 hours ago
- The Star
Suhakam welcomes Farah Nini Dusuki as chief Children's Commissioner
KUALA LUMPUR: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has welcomed the designation of Dr Farah Nini Dusuki as chief Children Commissioner until the end of her term as Human Rights Commissioner on March 8, 2026. In a statement on Saturday (Aug 2), Suhakam also welcomed the appointments of three new Human Rights Commissioners, Dr Mohd Al Adib Samuri, Dr Zufar Yadi Brendan Abdullah and Melissa Mohd Akhir, effective June 28 this year. Mohd Al Adib and Zufar Yadi have also been designated as children commissioners. All appointments and designations were made by Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the Prime Minister under Sections 5 and 6A of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 (Act 597), reflecting the government's ongoing commitment to strengthening the protection and promotion of children's rights in Malaysia. "Suhakam is confident that the experience, expertise, and unwavering dedication of the new Commissioners will enhance the Commission's efforts to safeguard the rights and well-being of all children, including those who are undocumented and in conflict with the law," the statement read. Farah Nini, appointed as Suhakam Commissioner on March 8, 2023, is a respected academician at the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya, with over 32 years of experience in child rights and human rights. She holds a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in child law from Cardiff University and has worked extensively with government agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on legal reforms, complaint mechanisms, and public advocacy related to critical children's issues. According to the statement, Mohd Al Adib, a scholar at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, focuses on child rights within the Islamic legal framework, collaborating with ministries, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and civil society on issues such as child marriage and the rights of refugee children. Zufar Yadi, with nearly four decades of experience, is active in social development and child-focused volunteer initiatives in Sarawak. Melissa Mohd Akhir, a child rights expert with regional experience, previously served as a Deputy Public Prosecutor and was involved in drafting child protection laws. She now focuses on access to justice and advocacy work. Suhakam said it looked forward to working collaboratively to build an inclusive and child-centred Malaysia, in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Child Act 2001 and reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring that every child in the country is protected, heard and allowed to thrive. "Suhakam hopes that these appointments and designations will support and enhance institutional responses to key child rights issues, particularly in ensuring access to quality education, robust child protection mechanisms, and a just and rehabilitative juvenile justice system," it said. – Bernama
Malay Mail
19 hours ago
- Malay Mail
When will Parliament act over concerns regarding arrest and remand of children? — Hafiz Hassan
AUGUST 2 — To arrest a person is to deprive him of his liberty by some lawful authority. (Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary) It is one of the initial steps taken in the criminal process which may lead to eventual prosecution of the arrested person. The main statute governing criminal process in Malaysia is the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), which is also the general statute on criminal procedure and processes. Now, when an arrested person is a child, the child is governed by the Child Act 2001(CA). The CA is a specific statute governing matters relating to children, including criminal procedure applicable to children. Under Section 2(1) of CA, a child is a person under the age of 18 years. In relation to criminal proceedings, a child is a person who has attained the age of criminal responsibility as prescribed in Section 82 of the Penal Code. In the absence of a specific provision in the CA concerning any criminal procedure, the provisions of the CPC apply. Part X of CA contains provisions on criminal procedure in the Court for Children. It starts with Section 83 which stipulates that a child shall not be arrested and detained except in compliance with the CA. Part X now includes provisions on arrest following amendments in 2016. These are contained in the new Section 83A which states as follows: (1) A child who is arrested shall not be handcuffed unless - (a) the offence with which he is arrested for is a grave crime; or (b) the child forcibly resists the endeavour to arrest him or attempts to evade the arrest. (2) When a child is arrested, he shall be informed of his grounds of arrest, and a police officer shall, as soon as may be, before commencing any form of questioning or recording of any statement from the child, communicate to the parent or guardian, or relative of the child and a probation officer to inform - (a) the child's whereabouts; (b) the grounds of the child's arrest; and (c) the right to consult with a counsel of the child's choice. (3) A police officer may allow the probation officer and the parent or guardian of a child to be present at the place where the child is being detained after arrest to ensure the child's welfare. (4) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect the powers of a police officer to deal with a child arrested in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. The writer argues it's time for Parliament to act on a 20-year-old legal gap: Malaysia's Child Act still lacks clear provisions on the arrest and remand of minors, leaving vulnerable children subject to general criminal procedures. — Reuters pic But apart from the above, there are no other provisions in the CA relating to the arrest of children. One may say that the CA is not comprehensive on a matter that deprives a child of his liberty. Arguably, the arrest of children should be guided by special criteria and procedures, considering who and how vulnerable they are. They have the right to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of their best interest and their sense of dignity and worth. Critical as well, the CA makes no provisions on remand of an arrested child for the purpose of investigation. As the Court of Appeal (COA) in the case of PP v N (A Child) said, the CA '[does] not provide for the detention of a child for the purpose of investigations'. Accordingly, Section 117 of CPC applies. The COA further said that 'if Parliament had intended to categorically prohibit a child from being detained for investigations for more than 24 hours, it would have said so precisely.' The consequence is an arrested child is subject to the general law on criminal procedure and processes. The case was decided in 2004. It's been more than 20 years now. Aminuddin Mustaffa and Norshamimi Mohd Mazlan of Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA) have argued that the law in the country '[does] not comply with international standards because it does not provide separate principles governing arrest and detention of children. The absence of clear and specific procedure of arrest of children appears to be inconsistent with the international standards set by the international instruments which require' that arrest of a child must be 'a measure of last resort and for the least reasonable period of time, in order for an arrest to be legally justifiable.' The writers have recommended that the law on arrest and remand of children be reviewed and reformed. [See Mustaffa, A., & Mazlan, N. (2022). 'Investigation process of children under Malaysian juvenile justice: To arrest or not to arrest?' Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 25(S2), 1-8] When will Parliament act? * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
