Peter Anthony has been convicted of forging a letter from the Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) deputy vice-chancellor's office for a system maintenance contract.
The Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court this morning also meted out a 3-year jail term and RM50,000 fine in lieu of 15 months of additional jail term against the former Sabah infrastructure development minister.
Judge Azura Alwi ruled that Peter failed to raise reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case.
However, she allowed an application by the accused's counsel, S Devanandan, to stay the jail sentence pending disposal of appeal at the Court of Appeal.
Today was set for the decision of the defence stage of the case against the former Warisan member and current president of Sabah-based Kesejahteraan Demokratik Masyarakat (KDM).
On Dec 14, 2021, Peter, 51, was ordered to enter his defence after the lower court found that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing a prima facie (sufficient to establish a fact or presumption unless successfully rebutted) case against him.
According to the charge under Section 468 of the Penal Code, Peter, the then managing director of Syarikat Asli Jati, was accused of forging a letter from the UMS deputy vice-chancellor's office dated June 9, 2014, by inserting a false statement with the intent of using it for fraudulent purposes.
He allegedly committed the offence at the office of the principal private secretary to the prime minister at the Perdana Putra building, Putrajaya, between June 13 and August 21, 2014. Conviction provides for imprisonment for up to seven years and a fine.
Motive and opportunity
In reading out her judgment, Azura dismissed the accused's defence as a mere afterthought and bare denial.
She said that the prosecution witnesses had no interest or gains in forging the letter, and circumstantial evidence, combined with other evidence, showed that only the accused had the motive and opportunity to commit the offence.
Azura said that only the accused, via Syarikat Asli Jati, has an interest in the contract.
She said that the court found from the collective testimony of prosecution witnesses that the accused had the intent to use the letter with the falsified UMS letterhead to obtain the contract for Syarikat Asli Jati.
Azura pointed out that the case resulted in two high-ranking UMS staff - whom she noted never got a single benefit from the whole matter - facing disciplinary proceedings from the university.
"The court finds that although there is no direct evidence to suggest that you have falsified (the document) by (writing) the title, there are circumstantial evidence and testimonies (to show that) only you have the opportunity to falsify, and these testimonies are enough (to prove) that you were the one who forged the document," she said.
Case against Peter a "stale charge"
Later during the sentencing hearing, Devanandan pleaded for a lenient penalty as the charge against the accused was a "stale charge".
The lawyer contended that Peter was only charged in court in 2020, while the alleged offence occurred in 2014 and the authorities' investigation in 2015.
Devanandan submitted that the accused established an impeccable reputation during his two-year time as Sabah state minister and in his role as Melalap assemblyperson.
However, deputy public prosecutor Haresh Prakash Somiah urged the court to impose a deterrent sentence because Peter allegedly committed the offence to "hijack" the project from another company that was purportedly initially awarded the project via direct tender.
The prosecutor claimed that Peter's own testimony during the trial's defence stage showed the accused allegedly admitting that lobbying for projects in a certain way is normal.
"This testimony shows the disturbing phenomena in this country that circumvention of tenders awarded fairly is a normal thing. Indirectly this showed such an action is a normal phenomenon.
"It is frightening as it came from a former (Sabah) minister admitting this as a normal habit. The accused was trying to justify that there is no law and regulation that does not allow him to do this.
"Good governance and transparency need to be practised in this country, including open tenders. If this is normal practice, what good is it for us to go through open tender if the process can be circumvented this way," Haresh said.
Devanandan then objected to the prosecution's claim that Peter committed a "hijack" on the contract, submitting that the accused's testimony, in reality, was merely referring to situations where a tender that has been awarded could be cancelled.
"Even the cabinet has decided that contracts given to companies can be cancelled. Are they (prosecution) saying that there is no such practice?" the lawyer contended.
Najib granted a stay of execution
Then during submission for a stay of execution over the jail sentence and fine, Devanandan cited former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak's RM42 million SRC International corruption.
The lawyer referred to the then Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali allowing the former finance minister's bid to stay the 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine against Najib. Najib's appeal is now before the apex court (Federal Court).
Nazlan has since been elevated to the Court of Appeal
Najib also happened to be the prime minister during the year when Peter allegedly committed the offence.
"Najib faced seven charges involving RM42 million. In that case, the court granted a stay of execution.
"Even when the Court of Appeal upheld the sentence (against Najib), it allowed a stay of execution (over Najib's jail term and fine).
"In our case, it just involved one charge as well as three years jail and RM50,000 fine," Devanandan said.
The lawyer explained that they would file the notice of appeal by next week and that they seek for the accused to be allowed to pay the fine next week if the lower court does not allow a stay over the fine.
However, deputy public prosecutor Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin objected to the stay of execution bid, submitting that Peter's document-forgery case is still serious due to how it was allegedly perpetrated.
"We submit that Nazlan's ruling is not good law, especially regarding (stay of execution on) the fine.
"That case (SRC case) has opened the floodgates in the lower courts when there are those (convicted persons) who sought a stay on the fine.
"My learned friend (Devanandan) sought to pay the fine by next week. But there is no basis for that as the fine is RM50,000.
"There is no difficulty for the accused to pay the fine as his bail amount itself is RM50,000," the prosecutor said.
Azura then allowed the stay on the custodial sentence pending appeal but directed Peter to settle the fine today. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.