KUALA LUMPUR: An accused person making representations to the Attorney-General (AG) to have charges dropped or reduced even after his defence has been called is not something unheard of, a lawyer said.
Salim Bashir, however, said the AG will only accede to such requests in rare and exceptional cases.
“The AG has allowed such representations in the past, so this should not raise the public’s eyebrows,” he said.
Salim said on March 11, 2019, the Shah Alam High Court freed an Indonesian woman accused of assassinating North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s half-brother, Jong-nam.
Salim said the prosecution withdrew the murder charge against Siti Aisyah after her defence was called.
At the time, the prosecution did not disclose in open court its reasons for discontinuing the case.
Her co-accused, Vietnamese Doan Thi Huong had her charge reduced later to voluntarily causing injury with a dangerous weapon, namely the VX nerve agent.
She received a 40-month jail term in April 2019 but left for home soon after the sentence was pronounced as she had been in remand since February 2017.
Salim, who represented Doan, said in both cases representations were made to the AG, and accepted.
He was responding to reports last Monday of Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s lawyers securing from Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah an adjournment of the deputy prime minister’s ongoing corruption trial to Aug 1 to enable the AG to review representations made by the defence about the case.
Deputy public prosecutor Abdul Malik Ayob also told the trial judge that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission is conducting further investigations into Zahid’s case.
The defence has called six witnesses so far but the trial has stalled since last November.
Zahid is accused of 47 counts of money laundering and criminal breach of trust (CBT) involving millions of ringgit from Yayasan Akalbudi and accepting bribes for various projects during his tenure as the home minister between 2013 and 2018.
Former AG Abu Talib Othman said a further adjournment would reflect badly on the present AG as the prosecution has already proved a prima facie case against Zahid.
However, Salim said the AG has power under Article 145(3) and Section 376 of the Criminal Procedure Code to drop or reduce charges at any stage of the trial.
“But wisdom dictates that it must be accompanied by good reasons,” he added.
Lawyer A Srimurugan said he was involved in a case where the AG withdrew a charge against his client after reasonable grounds were provided although the defence had already been called.
“Again, I must stress, it happens in the rarest of rare cases,” he said.
He added the prosecution’s rejection of representations made could also mean they want the defence to use any extremely favourable evidence they have to earn an acquittal for their client in court.
“This also gives the prosecution a chance to cross-examine defence witnesses to enable the court to determine the veracity of the evidence,” he added.
Srimurugan suggested an amendment to the law to remove the discretionary power given to the AG to withdraw charges once a trial has reached an advanced stage.
He said this will make the AG accountable for his decision-making process.
“The prosecution should not be allowed to let precious judicial time and resources go to waste – especially after a lengthy trial – by withdrawing a case without giving the courts and the public proper reasons,” he added. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.