The attorney-general is opposing the Malaysian Bar’s application for leave to begin judicial review proceedings over the decision to take no further action in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s Yayasan Akalbudi corruption trial.
Senior federal counsel Nurhafizza Azizan informed the High Court today that the attorney-general opposed the application.
Nurhafizza, appearing on behalf of the attorney-general, said the AG, as guardian of public interest, may either support or oppose leave applications depending on whether they are deemed frivolous.
Justice Alice Loke later fixed June 30 to decide whether the Bar’s leave application should proceed or be stayed pending the outcome of a related matter before the Federal Court.
AG and Zahid to seek appeal
On May 7, the Court of Appeal granted the Malaysian Bar leave to challenge the attorney-general’s decision to seek a discharge not amounting to an acquittal for Zahid in the Yayasan Akalbudi case involving 47 charges.
Nurhafizza said the attorney-general intended to file an application for leave to appeal under Section 96 of the Court of Judicature Act 1964.
“I have instructions to proceed with the leave for judicial review application, but not today,” she said.
She was assisted by federal counsel Imtiyaz Wizni Aufa Othman.
Lawyer S Abhilaash, representing the Bar, argued that the judicial review application should proceed as the Court of Appeal’s ruling was grounded in established legal principles.
Zahid’s lawyer, Shahrul Fazli Kamarulzaman, said his client would also seek leave to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision.
“We have until June 5 to file the application in the Federal Court,” he said.
Shahrul, assisted by Hamidi Noh, later urged the court to stay proceedings until the parties updated the court on the status of their Federal Court applications.
Bar argues NFA decision was unreasonable
The Malaysian Bar, in its application filed last month, contended that the attorney-general’s decision to discontinue criminal proceedings against Zahid was irrational, unreasonable and contrary to public interest.
The Bar is seeking a declaration that the NFA decision is null and void and exceeded the powers vested in the attorney-general under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution and Section 254(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
According to court filings, the Bar said the decision contradicted the High Court’s earlier ruling on Jan 22, 2022, which found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against Zahid.
Case history and previous rulings
On Sept 4, 2023, the High Court granted Zahid a DNAA on all 47 charges involving corruption, money laundering and criminal breach of trust after an application by the attorney-general.
The attorney-general said at the time that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission needed to reopen investigations into the case.
In December 2023, the Bar applied for leave to commence judicial review proceedings challenging the decision to grant the DNAA, arguing that it was irrational and unreasonable.
The High Court dismissed the application in June 2024.
However, the Court of Appeal later allowed the Bar’s appeal on May 7 this year, ruling that the case should be heard on its merits.
On Jan 28, Zahid filed an application seeking a full acquittal after the attorney-general informed the court that the case had been classified as NFA following the MACC’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to continue the prosecution.
The development prompted the Bar to file another judicial review application last month.
