Former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak's wife Rosmah Mansor has to abide by a notice to declare her property acquisition as part of an investigation by the authorities.
In throwing out Rosmah's application to strike out the notice in Kuala Lumpur today, High Court judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan ruled that abiding by the notice would not jeopardise her right to a fair trial as it was not related to her current 17 charges of money laundering.
"This negates the applicant's fear of having to disclose her defence or that the information obtained could be used against her in relation to those charges.
"The applicant's argument that she would be precluded from the right to a fair trial is therefore speculative and unmeritorious," Justice Mohamed Zaini said.
Zaini noted that the notice under Section 49 (1) (a) of Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLATFPUAA) only pertains to its power of investigation to assist it in identifying assets belonging to persons suspected of money laundering.
“The applicant’s claim to a right to silence and privilege against self-incrimination is a right that will be accorded to her during a trial, and does not in this case, extend to what I deem as a pre-trial process.
“I would again take solace with the prosecution’s repeated assurance that the investigation process here has no bearing with the 17 charges currently faced by the applicant.
“I also concur with the prosecution’s argument, that the right to remain silent, and the privilege against self-incrimination, are not constitutionality guaranteed rights,” he said.
Zaini pointed out that some flexibility is necessary in order to strike a balance between the public interest and the rights of the accused as the Act was formulated to address the blight of money laundering.
The judge said that the authorities must be given the leverage to conduct their investigations effectively, such as in the identifying of assets belonging to a person suspected of money laundering.
“Revealing one’s assets does not predicate guilt on the part of the person accused of money laundering.
“The presumption of innocence still applies to the applicant. The burden is still on the prosecution to establish guilt at a trial, if it comes to that.
“The applicant’s application under the Notice of Motion is therefore dismissed,” Zaini ruled.
Application to stay ruling fails
Rosmah’s lawyer Reza Rahim then made an oral application to stay the ruling in order for her to answer the notice, otherwise her appeal would be nugatory.
However, Zaini said the High Court has no jurisdiction to grant such a stay in the current matter which involves declaratory orders.
He instructed the defence to request for any extension of time to answer the notice from the prosecution.
At this juncture, deputy public prosecutor Gopal Sri Ram stood up and said “We have no instruction (over the matter).”
Rosmah was not present in court as it is understood that she had to attend to an important matter.
On May 10, Rosmah challenged the constitutionality of AMLATFPUAA , claiming that a provision under the law infringes her right to remain silent.
The defence argued that the notice under Section 49 of the Act violated Rosmah's right to have a fair trial and her privilege against self-incrimination, among others.
Two months ago, the prosecution has filed a notice against Rosmah for her to declare her property acquisition in a money-laundering case allegedly involving her.
She is facing 12 counts of money-laundering totalling RM7,097,750 and five charges of failing to declare her income linked to the alleged illicit proceeds to the Inland Revenue Board.
Rosmah pleaded not guilty to all the charges on Oct 4 last year at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court.
May 30 decision on joint trial of Rosmah and Rizal Mansor cases
Meanwhile earlier in the same court, Zaini set May 30 to deliver his decision on the prosecution’s application for a joint trial of the corruption and money-laundering cases of Rosmah and Rizal Mansor, a former special officer of Najib.
The judge set the date after hearing submissions from both parties in open-court proceedings this morning.
On May 8, the Kuala Lumpur High Court set today to hear the application.
In relation to the corruption case involving the supply and installation of rural school solar energy in Sarawak, Rosmah faces two charges of seeking RM187.5 million and receiving RM1.5 million two years ago.
She was charged under Section 16(a)(A) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and is liable to be punished under Section 24 of the same act which provides for a maximum jail term of 20 years and a fine of not less than five times the sum or value of the bribe or RM100,000 whichever is higher upon conviction.
Rizal who was represented by Ridha Abdah Subri pleaded not guilty to four charges of seeking and receiving bribes for himself and Rosmah amounting to RM5.5 million involving the project to supply and install rural school solar energy in Sarawak under Section 16(a)(A) of MACC Act 2009. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.