Year of high profile verdicts, two get jail and fine, others freed
2020 has indeed been an eventful year for the country’s judiciary with verdicts made over several high-profile cases, with the most prominent involving former prime minister Najib Razak.
Other court cases that took centre stage this year included on the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) scandal, corruption, criminal breach of trust (CBT), and money laundering which involved prominent leaders in the country.
On Jul 28, Najib was sentenced to 12 years' jail and fined RM210 million by High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali after finding him guilty on seven charges of CBT, money laundering, and abuse of position involving RM42 million of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds.
Nazlan, in his 801-page grounds of judgment dated Aug 21, regarded the case as the worst kind of CBT involving a prime minister.
Not satisfied with the ruling, Najib, 67, filed an appeal and submitted 307 grounds why he should be freed of the charges...
2020 has indeed been an eventful year for the country’s judiciary with verdicts made over several high-profile cases, with the most prominent involving former prime minister Najib Razak.
Other court cases that took centre stage this year included on the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) scandal, corruption, criminal breach of trust (CBT), and money laundering which involved prominent leaders in the country.
On Jul 28, Najib was sentenced to 12 years' jail and fined RM210 million by High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali after finding him guilty on seven charges of CBT, money laundering, and abuse of position involving RM42 million of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds.
Nazlan, in his 801-page grounds of judgment dated Aug 21, regarded the case as the worst kind of CBT involving a prime minister.
Not satisfied with the ruling, Najib, 67, filed an appeal and submitted 307 grounds why he should be freed of the charges.
The Court of Appeal fixed 12 days next year, from Feb 15 to 18, Feb 22 to 25, and March 1 to 4, to hear the appeal by the Pekan MP, who is currently out on bail of RM2 million in two sureties.
On Dec 21, another High Court sentenced former Federal Territories Minister Tengku Adnan Mansor, 70, to 12 months in jail and a RM2 million fine, in default of six months’ jail, after finding him guilty on a graft charge of receiving RM2 million from a businessperson in 2016.
However, judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan granted Tengku Adnan’s application for a stay of execution of the jail term and fine pending his appeal.
The judge among others held that the RM2 million given by the businessperson, Chai Kin Kong, to Tengku Adnan had remained in Tadmansori Holdings Sdn Bhd’s (THSB) account for his benefit and that he had used the company, which he (Tengku Adnan) owns, as a facade to receive the fruits of his crime.
The decision by the court is the second high-profile case involving Umno leaders found guilty of criminal charges that were filed during the Pakatan Harapan federal government, following the fall of BN in May 2018.
Tengku Adnan was also charged in another High Court with accepting a RM1 million bribe from another businessperson, Tan Eng Boon, but on Dec 7, he was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) on the charge.
The money was deposited into Tengku Adnan’s CIMB Bank account as an inducement to assist an application by Nucleus Properties Sdn Bhd to increase the company’s plot ratio with regard to a development project on Lot 228, Jalan Semarak, here.
According to the court, it was not an order for full acquittal, but the DNAA was granted following the prosecution’s application as it did not wish to continue with the prosecution as there were new developments in the case.
Tan pleaded guilty to an alternative charge with abetting the politician in committing the offence, and was fined RM1.5 million.
Meanwhile, Najib’s stepson, Hollywood producer Riza Shahriz Abdul Aziz, was also given a DNAA by the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on May 14 for money laundering, involving US$248 million (RM1 billion), allegedly misappropriated from 1MDB funds.
He was given the DNAA following an agreement with the prosecution under the terms of which the federal government will receive several million ringgit.
The MACC, in a statement issued the same day (May 14), stated that under the agreement, Riza was required to pay a compound to the government under Section 92 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, which is punitive as an alternative to the charges that were brought against him.
It said the Malaysian government was expected to recover assets worth US$107.3 million (RM435 million).
On Sept 4, again on the 1MDB saga, the High Court acquitted and discharged UK-based Goldman Sachs International Ltd and its two Asian entities, Goldman Sachs (Asia) LLC and Goldman Sachs (Singapore), on charges relating to the sale of 1MDB bonds amounting to RM27.2 billion (US$6.7 billion) after the prosecution withdrew all the charges against them.
Another high-profile case involved former Sabah chief minister Musa Aman, who was acquitted on 46 corruption and money laundering charges in connection with contracts for timber concessions in the state.
The prosecution informed judge Muhammad Jamil Hussin that it had withdrawn all the charges made against Musa, 69, in both the cases (corruption and money laundering).
Musa’s lawyer Francis Ng Aik Guan said both cases needed an ending and the court ought to make an apt decision, that is to acquit and discharge his client of all charges for fear that he will be re-charged.
On June 16, the High Court ordered former Felda chairperson Mohd Isa Samad to enter his defence on nine corruption charges, involving RM3 million, in connection with the purchase of Merdeka Palace Hotel & Suites (MPHS) by Felda Investment Corporation Sdn Bhd (FICSB).
However, he was discharged and acquitted on one CBT charge over the hotel purchase for RM160 million without the approval of the Felda board of directors.
In his judgment, Nazlan said there was credible evidence against Mohd Isa in respect of the nine charges, but the prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case on the CBT charge.
The defence closed its case on Sept 3 after calling six witnesses, including Mohd Isa, who will know his fate this Feb 3, whether he walks out of the court a free man or be convicted of the charges.
On Dec 11, the prosecution, in Najib’s wife, Rosmah Mansor’s corruption trial involving the solar hybrid project for rural schools in Sarawak closed its case after calling 23 witnesses.
Following this, Zaini fixed Feb 10 next year to hear the oral submissions before deciding whether to acquit or order Rosmah to enter her defence.
Najib and two of his sons were also sued by the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) for not paying their taxes.
IRB had obtained a summary judgment against them, whereby the court had ordered Najib and his sons, Mohd Nazifuddin, 37, and Mohamad Nizar, 42, to pay a total of RM1.74 billion.
The amount owed by Najib is RM1.69 billion, Mohd Nazifuddin (RM37.6 million), and Mohamad Nizar (RM13.16 million).
The three of them appealed against the ruling and the Court of Appeal set June 16 for the hearing.
Meanwhile, Tengku Adnan was also sued by IRB for income tax arrears, but the matter was resolved at the High Court on Sept 23 with Tengku Adnan agreeing to pay RM40,358,336.61.
The IRB initially sued Tengku Adnan over unpaid taxes with a 10 percent increment totalling RM57,167,069.35 for assessment years 2012 to 2017.
According to the draft consent order obtained by the media through the court search system, the Malaysian government through IRB agreed to amend Tengku Adnan's additional assessment notices for the assessment years 2012 to 2017.
"The additional amended tax amounted to RM40,358,336.61, including the penalties as part of the total tax settlement and is considered as a composite assessment under Section 96A of the Income Tax Act 1967,” it said.
Another issue that took centre stage this year was on the Penang undersea tunnel project, where former finance minister Lim Guan Eng is facing charges for corruption and CBT over the project.
Lim, 60, was charged in the KL Sessions Court as well as in Butterworth in August on two graft and two CBT charges, with all of them to be tried together at the KL Sessions Court.
The court had set 31 days beginning this June for the trial.
The Bagan MP was also slapped with one corruption charge at the Butterworth Sessions Court for allegedly helping to secure the project to a company, while businessperson Phang Li Koon was charged with abetting him in committing the offence.
Lim’s wife, Betty Chew Gek Cheng was charged with counts of money laundering charges.
The cases have been fixed for mention on Feb 19.
Meanwhile, a former member of the police Special Action Unit (UTK), Azilah Hadri, has failed in his final legal bid to set aside his conviction and death sentence for the murder of Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu, following the Federal Court’s decision in dismissing his review application against the conviction on Dec 8.
Azilah, however, has one option left, which is to seek a royal pardon from the Selangor Sultan. He has filed an application to have the death sentence commuted to a prison term.
Another interesting case this year was an attempt to stop the Sabah state election at the eleventh hour by Jahid @ Noordin Jahim, but it was thrown out by the Federal Court.
Jahid had wanted to stay the state election pending disposal of an appeal over who was the rightful chief minister of Sabah - Mohd Shafie Apdal or Musa Aman.
The apex court made the ruling on Sept 11, a day before the nomination for the Sabah election, with polling held on Sept 26.
Decisions on some civil matters also made headlines, including the one made by the High Court on Aug 7 in allowing an application by Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and three others to strike out a suit brought by former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and five others over the nullification of their membership in Bersatu.
The judge ruled that Mahathir and the other plaintiffs had no locus standi to bring the legal action against the defendants, saying that the court was guided by the provision of law and cases referred under Section 18C of the Societies Act 1966 which states that any decision of political parties is final and cannot be challenged in court.
Another was on a High Court ruling on Sept 3 that the one-day Parliament sitting on May 18 was valid and in accordance with the law, even though it was unusual and unprecedented, to avoid the spread of Covid-19.
Judge Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid made the ruling after dismissing an originating summons filed by lawyer R Kengadharan and a social activist D Arumugam, against Muhyiddin and former Dewan Rakyat speaker Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof, for a declaration that the one-day Parliament sitting was unconstitutional.
- Bernama
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.