The Sessions Court in Kuala Lumpur has fixed Sept 1 to decide if PKR vice-president Rafizi Ramli must enter his defence on charges under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972.

Sessions judge Zulqarnain Hassan fixed the date after the prosecution closed its case this morning, having called two police officers, including the investigating officer.

Supt R Rajagopal was the final witness called by the prosecution led by DPPs Shukor Abu Bakar and Zhafran Rahim Azfar.

Rafizi is facing two charges under the OSA for disclosing classified documents that purportedly link Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera and 1MDB at the Parliament lobby on March 24 and 28 this year.

Earlier, DSP Aishah Be Abd Kadir, a computer forensic officer attached with the police, verified that a central processing unit (CPU), a laptop and a Lenovo handphone were seized by the police.

The witness said the laptop and handphone were taken from Rafizi's home in Bukit Antarabangsa, while the CPU was picked up at the PKR office in Tropicana.

When questioned by Shukor, Rajagopal said what was posted on Rafizi's blog over the LTAT document was similar to the content of page 98 of the final audit report on 1MDB classified under the OSA.

It was previously reported that an officer from the audit department by the name of Nor Salwani Muhammad, had lodged a report following the discovery of the document on Rafizi's blog.

Auditor-general Ambrin Buang had earlier testified that he asked Nor Salwani to lodge the report after discovering the leak.

He also told the court that he decided to classify the final audit report on 1MDB under the OSA following a leak of the interim report which was handed over to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

Arrest not proper

During the cross-examination of Rajagopal, Rafizi's lawyer Gobind Singh Deo expressed disappointment over the manner the PKR vice-president and secretary-general was arrested.

The investigating officer (IO) noted the dispute regarding the arrest which took place outside Parliament.

Gobind: As an IO, you gave the direction to arrest the person being investigated and also responsible in the arrest?

Rajagopal: Yes.

Gobind: Is Rafizi a public figure?

Rajagopal: Yes.

Gobind: Was the Parliament in session then?

Rajagopal: Yes.

Gobind: Is he someone who is easily contactable?

Rajagopal: Yes.

Gobind: Hence, why the need to arrest him outside the Parliament gates by using two police cars, where he was pulled into a car? Why is there a need to do that?

Rajagopal: For investigation purposes. I cannot explain on the manner of his arrest as I was not there during the arrest.

Gobind: No, my question is why was there a need to arrest him like that? You are the IO. I put it to you that the arrest is completely unnecessary.

Rajagopal: I do not agree as the arrest is necessary to assist investigation under the OSA.

Gobind: Yes, you have to make the arrest but my question was the need to arrest in Parliament when there is a seating. He is an MP who is easily contactable. Why the need to arrest him like that. It is unnecessary right?

Rajagopal: I do not agree.

The witness further explained that he was not there but Gobind expressed concern over police professionalism in making the arrest, asking whether a judge could be arrested in such a manner.