The Court of Appeal has granted the Malaysian Bar leave to initiate a judicial review challenging the attorney-general’s decision to seek a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) for Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
The decision pertains to the Yayasan Akalbudi corruption case involving the deputy prime minister.
Justice Faizah Jamaludin, leading a unanimous three-member panel, stated that the statutory body representing over 25,000 lawyers had successfully met the necessary threshold for the merits of the case to be heard in the High Court.
The panel, which included Justices Lim Hock Leng and Nadzrin Wok Nordin, ruled that the Bar has an arguable case that is not frivolous.
The judge further noted that the attorney-general’s decision to obtain a DNAA is subject to judicial review in cases deemed appropriate, rare, and exceptional.
This ruling reverses a previous High Court decision that had blocked the Bar’s attempt to question the prosecutorial move.
Background of the corruption trial
On Sept 4, 2023, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who also serves as the Umno president, was granted a DNAA involving 47 charges related to corruption, money laundering, and criminal breach of trust.
The discharge was requested by the prosecution pending further investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
The granting of the DNAA drew significant attention as the High Court had previously ruled that the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused.
At the time the order was made by Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah, the trial had already reached the defence stage, with Ahmad Zahid and 14 other defence witnesses having completed their testimony.
Following the discharge, the Malaysian Bar filed for leave in December 2023 to challenge the attorney-general’s discretion.
However, the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed the application on June 27, 2024, leading to the current successful appeal at the appellate court.
Prosecution cites insufficient evidence
The Attorney-General’s Chambers had previously defended the decision in a statement issued on Jan 8.
The prosecution maintained that, following the MACC investigation, there was insufficient evidence to continue with the existing charges against the deputy prime minister.
During the appellate proceedings, the Malaysian Bar was represented by a legal team comprising Ambiga Sreenevasan, Steven Thiru, and S Sivaneindiren.
Counsel Hisyam Teh Poh Teik appeared on behalf of Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, while senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambali represented the attorney-general.
The case will now return to the High Court for a hearing on the merits of the judicial review, focusing on whether the attorney-general’s exercise of power in this instance was lawful and justified.
