The DAP’s legal bureau chairman says it does not inspire public confidence and raises serious questions about the transparency of the investigations.
In a statement today, Ramkarpal, a former deputy law minister, said the AGC’s move to classify the case as NFA does not inspire public confidence and raises serious questions about the transparency of its investigations and decision-making process.
Ramkarpal said while the AGC attributed its decision to a comprehensive review of available material, it failed to clarify whether it had reassessed the prima facie findings made by the High Court in 2023.
“With respect, this is not a case in which no findings were made,” he said, noting that it is a matter of public record that the High Court had found a prima facie case against the Umno president at the close of the prosecution’s case.
The prima facie finding meant the long-serving Bagan Datuk MP was legally required to enter his defence.
The prosecution applied for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) for all 47 charges on Sept 4, 2023.
Trial judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah subsequently granted Zahid a DNAA on the 47 charges of corruption, money laundering and criminal breach of trust to allow the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to conduct further investigations.
Ramkarpal pointed out that the trial in the High Court, which began in 2019, lasted nearly four years, during which numerous prosecution witnesses testified.
“Given the circumstances, the AGC must explain why it is now of the view that the prima facie findings of the High Court no longer carry weight, especially when those findings were based on its own evidence presented in court,” he said.
Ramkarpal warned that a failure to provide a satisfactory and transparent explanation would likely further erode public confidence in the AGC, describing such an outcome as “ill-advised”.
Lawyer Rajesh Nagarajan also called on the AGC to explain why it stated that the evidence against Zahid was “insufficient to support the continuation of the prosecution” after reviewing further investigations and additional material.
Rajesh said while the evidence was strong enough for the court to find a case to answer – and to justify years of public expenditure – the AGC now claimed that the same case was no longer viable.
“This contradiction strikes at the heart of public confidence in the justice system. More troubling is the absence of any meaningful explanation for what has changed.
“Ordinary Malaysians are left asking a simple question: why pursue the case this far if there was never an intention to see it through?
“When a court has progressed to this stage, justice cannot be placed in indefinite limbo,” he said, adding that it might create a perception that there was a reluctance to complete the legal process when the accused was a powerful political figure.
Earlier today, the AGC announced that it had found insufficient evidence to proceed with the charges against Zahid following further investigations, effectively bringing the long-running case to an end.
Zahid had been accused of embezzling millions of ringgit from his foundation, Yayasan Akalbudi, and of accepting bribes for various projects during his tenure as home minister between 2013 and 2018.
The AGC previously dismissed claims that its reputation and credibility had been tarnished by the conditional discharge granted to Zahid, with then attorney-general Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh stating that such decisions could be made even after a prima facie case had been established. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.