Businessperson Tan denied stay in graft case linked to Ku Nan
Businessperson Tan Eng Boon failed in his application for the Kuala Lumpur High Court to temporarily stay his corruption case linked to former federal territories minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor.
In issuing the ruling today, judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali said that applicant Tan did not manage to show any exceptional and unusual circumstances to justify the interim stay of proceedings at the High Court.
Tan had sought the stay of proceedings pending his appeal at the Court of Appeal to reverse a decision that allowed a transfer of his case from the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court to the High Court...
Businessperson Tan Eng Boon (photo, above) failed in his application for the Kuala Lumpur High Court to temporarily stay his corruption case linked to former federal territories minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor.
In issuing the ruling today, judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali said that applicant Tan did not manage to show any exceptional and unusual circumstances to justify the interim stay of proceedings at the High Court.
Tan had sought the stay of proceedings pending his appeal at the Court of Appeal to reverse a decision that allowed a transfer of his case from the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court to the High Court.
On March 20, it was reported that Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan allowed the prosecution’s application to transfer Tan’s case from the Sessions Court to the High Court.
Nazlan today ruled that a stay application requires the applicant to show sufficient justification for such a stay of proceedings as seen in the March 27 Federal Court ruling.
It was reported that on March 27, a seven-person Federal Court panel dismissed an application by former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak to stay his RM42 million SRC International case.
Najib had sought the interim stay pending disposal of his related interlocutory appeals at the Federal Court.
Nazlan noted that the possibility of Tan’s appeal succeeding at the Court of Appeal does not amount to exceptional and unusual circumstances.
“Even if the Court of Appeal decides that (Tan’s graft case) should be at the Sessions Court rather than the High Court, but based on the Federal Court case (March 27 ruling), this is not an exceptional circumstance,” Nazlan said today.
The prosecution was conducted by deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Julia Ibrahim while Tan was represented by counsel Faisal Moideen.
In November last year, Tan was charged under Section 16 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Act 2009 with bribing Tengku Adnan via a Public Bank cheque belonging to Pekan Nenas Industries Sdn Bhd, which was deposited into the former minister's CIMB account.
The alleged payment, made on Dec 27, 2013, was for Tengku Adnan, who is widely referred to as Ku Nan, for giving approval to the company's application to increase the plot ratio for land on Jalan Semarak, Kuala Lumpur.
If convicted under the MACC Act, the accused faces a maximum jail term of 20 years and five times the bribe amount.
Alternatively, Tan is also accused of abetting with Ku Nan in his corruption charge, under Section 109 of the Penal Code and read together with Section 165 of the same code.
Under this section, the businessperson faces up to two years' jail or a fine or both.
Aug 9 for decision for joint hearing with Ku Nan's case
Meanwhile, in the same court, Nazlan (photo, above) also set Aug 9 for a decision on the prosecution’s application for joint-trial of Tan’s case with that of Tengku Adnan.
The judge set the date after hearing submissions by DPP Julia and Tan’s lawyer Faisal.
Earlier today, Julia submitted that Tan’s case should be heard together with Tengku Adnan’s corruption case because both were allegedly involved in the same transaction, per Section 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
“We focus on the issue of the same transaction in the offences (allegedly) committed by Tengku Adnan and Tan Eng Boon.
“The only difference is that one is the giver, the other is the receiver,” she said.
Julia said that this necessitates joint hearing of the matter as the offences were allegedly committed with a unity of purpose in the same transaction and same date, among other similar details of the purported offence.
Faisal, however, argued that his client’s case should not be heard jointly with Tengku Adnan’s as this would prejudice the accused.
The lawyer said that in the event that both cases are heard jointly, there may arise a situation where Tengku Adnan may elect to remain silent as part of his defence, which in turn would deprive Tan’s defence.
Faisal said that Tan, in his defence, would need to explain the situation involving the alleged bribe and this required the accused to be able to call Tengku Adnan and question him about it.
“However, if the defence is called (against both Tan and Tengku Adnan in a joint hearing), Tengku Adnan (photo, above) could elect to remain silent, which would deprive my client of the ability to question Tengku Adnan.
“If my client is called to enter his defence, he would need to explain where the cheque (alleged bribe) came from.
“If the cheque was (allegedly) given to Tengku Adnan, then how to explain it without calling Tengku Adnan (to question him about it),” Faisal submitted.
It was previously reported that Tengku Adnan’s graft case before Nazlan would begin on Sept 3.
On Nov 15 last year, Tengku Adnan claimed trial to receiving RM1 million gratification from Tan, through a Public Bank cheque belonging to Pekan Nenas Industries Sdn Bhd, which was deposited into his CIMB Bank account.
The money was allegedly given to obtain approval for an application by Nucleus Properties Sdn Bhd (now known as Paragon City Development Sdn Bhd) to increase the plot ratio for a development project at Lot 228 on Jalan Semarak, Kuala Lumpur.
The offence allegedly took place at CIMB’s Putra World Trade Centre branch on Dec 27, 2013.
Tan was a director of Nucleus Properties at the time.
The charge was laid under Section 16(a) of the MACC Act 2009, which specifies a maximum jail term of 20 years, and a fine of not less than five times the amount or value of the gratification, or RM10,000, whichever is higher.
Tengku Adnan also faces an alternative charge where, in his capacity as then federal territories minister, he is accused of receiving RM1 million without consideration from Tan.
The former minister allegedly received the money despite knowing that Tan was a director of Nucleus Properties and had ties to his official functions.
Tengku Adnan was charged under Section 165 of the Penal Code and faces imprisonment up to two years or with a fine, or both if convicted.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.