The Court of Appeal allowed the Malaysian Bar’s bid to challenge the prosecution’s decision to seek a DNAA for Ahmad Zahid in his corruption case.
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal today allowed the Malaysian Bar’s bid to challenge the prosecution’s decision to halt all further proceedings against Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in the Yayasan Akalbudi corruption case.
A three-member bench comprising Justice Datuk Faizah Jamaludin, presiding with Justices Datuk Dr Lim Hock Leng and Datuk Nadzarin Wok Nordin, ruled that the Bar’s application was not frivolous and had raised arguable points of law that warranted a full hearing at the substantive stage.
“This is an appropriate, rare and exceptional case that warrants a full judicial review. Leave is granted to the appellant to commence judicial review against the Attorney-General’s impugned decision. Thus, the High Court’s decision dated June 27, 2024, is set aside.
“The matter is remitted to the High Court for the substantive hearing of the judicial review. There shall be no order as to costs,” Justice Faizah said in the unanimous decision.
READ MORE: DNAA in Zahid case not against the law says counsel
On June 27, 2024, the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed the Malaysian Bar’s application for leave to initiate judicial review proceedings, ruling that the application failed to meet the requisite threshold for judicial review. The Bar subsequently filed the present appeal.
Justice Faizah also observed that this case met the criteria of being appropriate, rare, and exceptional, as several key factors had converged, notably the seriousness of the charges and the strong public interest surrounding corruption prosecutions.
“These include the prima facie finding after maximum evaluation, the calling of the defence, the extent of proceedings already undertaken — involving 99 prosecution witnesses over 53 trial days and 15 defence witnesses — as well as the timing and number of representations, and the practical finality of the discontinuance.
“Since the criminal court’s DNAA order was a procedural consequence of the Attorney General’s impugned decision, the appellant is not challenging the criminal court’s order granting the DNAA.
“What is being challenged is the executive root of that order, namely the AG’s decision to discontinue the prosecution in respect of the charges against the respondent (Ahmad Zahid) and to seek a DNAA.
“Accordingly, we find that the appellant’s application for judicial review was not a collateral attack on the criminal court’s order granting a DNAA in respect of all 47 charges against the respondent,” she said.
The Bar is seeking to challenge the AG’s decision on Sept 4, 2023, to grant Ahmad Zahid a DNAA on 47 charges involving criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering related to the Yayasan Akalbudi funds.
The Bar also seeks a declaration from the court that the decision made by then-High Court Judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah (now a Federal Court judge) is null and void, having been made in excess of the jurisdiction conferred upon the AG.
The court arrived at its decision to grant the DNAA after the prosecution informed it that the Attorney General’s Chambers intended to halt proceedings against Ahmad Zahid in order to scrutinise new evidence.
Justice Faizah also observed that this case met the criteria of being appropriate, rare, and exceptional, as several key factors had converged, notably the seriousness of the charges and the strong public interest surrounding corruption prosecutions.
“These include the prima facie finding after maximum evaluation, the calling of the defence, the extent of proceedings already undertaken — involving 99 prosecution witnesses over 53 trial days and 15 defence witnesses — as well as the timing and number of representations, and the practical finality of the discontinuance.
“Since the criminal court’s DNAA order was a procedural consequence of the Attorney General’s impugned decision, the appellant is not challenging the criminal court’s order granting the DNAA.
“What is being challenged is the executive root of that order, namely the AG’s decision to discontinue the prosecution in respect of the charges against the respondent (Ahmad Zahid) and to seek a DNAA.
“Accordingly, we find that the appellant’s application for judicial review was not a collateral attack on the criminal court’s order granting a DNAA in respect of all 47 charges against the respondent,” she said.
The Bar is seeking to challenge the AG’s decision on Sept 4, 2023, to grant Ahmad Zahid a DNAA on 47 charges involving criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering related to the Yayasan Akalbudi funds.
The Bar also seeks a declaration from the court that the decision made by then-High Court Judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah (now a Federal Court judge) is null and void, having been made in excess of the jurisdiction conferred upon the AG.
The court arrived at its decision to grant the DNAA after the prosecution informed it that the Attorney General’s Chambers intended to halt proceedings against Ahmad Zahid in order to scrutinise new evidence.
