Rosmah claims AMLA infringes her right to remain silent
Rosmah Mansor today challenged the constitutionality of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (Amla), claiming that a provision under the law infringes her right to remain silent.
This was heard by the Kuala Lumpur High Court this evening during submissions by Rosmah's lawyers to strike out a notice which was filed by the prosecution in her money-laundering case to compel her to declare her property acquisition.
Rosmah Mansor today challenged the constitutionality of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (Amla), claiming that a provision under the law infringes her right to remain silent.
This was heard by the Kuala Lumpur High Court this evening during submissions by Rosmah's lawyers to strike out a notice which was filed by the prosecution in her money-laundering case to compel her to declare her property acquisition.
The defence argued that the notice under Section 49 of Amla violated Rosmah's right to have a fair trial and her privilege against self-incrimination.
Lawyer Rajivan Nambiar told the court that it was an abuse of power by the state to compel his client into answering the prosecution's questions which is against her right to remain silent.
"The presumption of innocence is the fundamental right under Article 5 of the constitution," he said in his submission.
Rajivan also argued that the notice to compel Rosmah was "highly prejudicial" against his client and that it was akin to the prosecution asking her to reveal her defence after having charged her in court.
Rajivan's co-counsel Reza Rahim, meanwhile, argued that the Section 49 notice was an attempt to get information from Rosmah, wife of former premier Najib Abdul Razak through "coercion, oppression, and against her will".
He said Amla was not the same as other special laws like the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) which reflected Article 149 of the Federal Constitution to suspend the rights of a suspect in the name of national security.
On the opposite side, meanwhile, lead prosecutor Gopal Sri Ram argued that their notice was an investigative procedure which in turn was a pre-trial matter and thus did not infringe upon Rosmah's right to a fair trial.
According to Gopal (below), Amla was a special law that was legislated by Parliament to combat money-laundering activities. The act was designed to discover properties which were suspected to be a subject matter of money laundering, he added.
"And the person in possession of these properties would be the best person to reveal the information of the properties," he told the court.
After hearing submissions from both sides, Justice Mohamed Zaini Mazlan told counsel that he will deliver his judgment on May 24.
Last month, the prosecution has filed a notice against Rosmah for her to declare her property acquisition in her money-laundering case.
She is facing 12 counts of money-laundering totalling RM7,097,750 and five charges of failing to declare her income to the Inland Revenue Board.
Rosmah pleaded not guilty to all the charges on Oct 4 last year at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.