Rafizi: Refile charges without further delay
Day in court: Najib arriving at the Kuala Lumpur Courts Complex. — Bernama
PETALING JAYA: As Datuk Seri Najib Razak hails as relief the temporary discharge of his money laundering case involving RM27mil, a lawmaker urges swift refiling of the charges.
Pandan MP Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli urged the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) to clarify how it would refile the charges involving RM27mil from SRC International Sdn Bhd against the former prime minister without further delay.
Rafizi made the call following the High Court granting Najib a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) order for all three charges in the case.
A DNAA releases an accused from a charge without clearing them of the offence, meaning they can still be prosecuted later.
Rafizi said it was unacceptable that, despite Najib being charged in 2019, the trial has yet to begin due to the prosecution's failure to complete the required documentation.
'I urge the prosecution to refile the charges as soon as possible and prepare the necessary documents so the case can proceed,' the former Economy Minister said in a statement.
While acknowledging Najib's right to seek a discharge, Rafizi questioned the prolonged delay, especially as the former was already serving a prison sentence in another case involving SRC International funds.
The AGC in an immediate response to the development said it will examine and consider all aspects before taking any further action on the case.
The AGC said there were some documents which are material for the current SRC International trial, and the prosecution has no choice but to wait until the relevant material documents were obtained after the 1MDB trial proceedings are completed.
'It should be emphasised that the material documents are already available but are being used as evidence in the ongoing 1MDB trial,' the AGC said.
'The prosecution has requested time to gather all relevant material documents to be presented as evidence and testimony in the second SRC trial. This delay is not intentional but is to ensure that the integrity of the documents as evidence in the trial is always maintained.
It said the case was postponed several times namely due to the Movement Control Order linked to the Covid-19 pandemic, requests by Najib's counsel and the prosecution as the documents was used in the then ongoing first SRC case and the currently ongoing 1MDB case.
'This department emphasises that the allegations by certain parties that this department carries out 'defective prosecution' are completely unfounded. This department always maintains the highest level and quality in line with expectations of the people.
'This department remains committed to upholding the rule of law and will continue to carry out its responsibilities under the Federal Constitution with integrity, fairness and respect for the judicial process,' it said.
Meanwhile, Najib's lawyer, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, said his client welcomed the court's decision, noting that it reduced the number of active cases against him.
'He's very happy and can now concentrate on the 1MDB trial, which is set for submissions in October,' Shafee told reporters after the court granted the DNAA order.
Shafee explained that the AGC cannot appeal the DNAA but may choose to refile the case.
'But we hope they don't,' he added.
With the DNAA order, Najib now faces only one active criminal trial – the RM2.28bil 1MDB case, scheduled to resume in October.
Najib was acquitted from the 1MDB audit tampering case in March 2023, and a DNAA in the RM6.6bil IPIC-related case last November.
He is currently serving a prison sentence for his conviction in the RM42mil SRC International graft case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysiakini
29 minutes ago
- Malaysiakini
We had 'no other choice', AGC says over Najib's DNAA
The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) said it "did not have any other choice" but to await the conclusion of Najib Abdul Razak's 1MDB and the first SRC International trials, before it could use the overlapping documents required for the second SRC International case. The agency emphasised the necessity of securing the required documents as evidence, explaining that...
Focus Malaysia
35 minutes ago
- Focus Malaysia
Rafizi to speak freely, unbound by ministerial post
FORMER economy minister and PKR MP Rafizi Ramli stated on his podcast 'Yang Berhenti Menteri' that he would rather resign from the Cabinet than remain a 'lame duck' minister unable to voice differing opinions. Now that he is free to voice differing opinions, he took a swipe at the Education Ministry, questioning, 'Where's the major policy framework (from the ministry)? But they're busy talking about someone who resigned.' He said their bickering about his resignation annoyed him, and after two years and a half, the ministry in question has nothing to show. He stepped down after losing the PKR deputy presidency to Nurul Izzah Anwar, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's daughter, believing it signalled Anwar's lack of confidence in his leadership. Rafizi argued that staying on as a minister in the Cabinet of Anwar would undermine his legitimacy, hinder economic reforms, and make him complicit in the toxic political culture he opposes. He rejected an offer to be an appointed deputy president, seeing it as a way to silence him while exploiting his supporters. Rafizi emphasised the need for space for dissent within PKR to uphold reform principles and warned against dismissing grassroots members, indirectly criticising PKR figures like Fadhlina Sidek and R Ramanan for overlooking the party's history and supporters. He highlighted achievements in the Economy Ministry but noted the 13th Malaysia Plan and Anti-Rent Seeking Act as unfinished initiatives. While denying plans to form a new party, Rafizi humorously mentioned a gathering to 'celebrate' his loss, focusing on maintaining government stability. — June 21, 2025
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Legal quagmire when a fatwa does not apply to companies but a ruling does — Hafiz Hassan
JUNE 21 — According to Article 160(2) of the Federal Constitution, law includes written law, which in turn comprises federal law and state law. Federal law includes legislation made by Parliament (Acts), while state law consists of legislation enacted by the State Legislative Assemblies (Enactments or Ordinances). A fatwa is both federal and state law. It is federal law when issued under the Administration of Islamic Law Act, and it is state law when made under the respective Enactments or Ordinances of each state — but law nonetheless. A fatwa (plural: fatawa) in Islamic jurisprudence is a formal ruling or interpretation on a point of Islamic law, issued by a qualified legal scholar (mufti) in response to a specific question posed by an individual (mustafti). The ruling is a practical application of Islamic law to a particular issue and is given after the mufti has engaged in ijtihad to reach a legal conclusion. Ijtihad refers to the process of striving to derive legal rulings from the primary sources of Islamic law — the Quran and the Sunnah — when a clear and direct ruling is not available. It involves a comprehensive understanding of Islamic legal theory (usul al-fiqh) and the ability to apply it to new or emerging issues. The relationship between ijtihad and fatwa is this: ijtihad is the methodology; fatwa is the product. A mufti uses ijtihad to formulate a legal conclusion, which is then issued as a fatwa. Although considered authoritative, fatwas are generally not binding and typically serve as advisory opinions. Under Malaysian law (Acts, Enactments or Ordinances), a fatwa is defined as a ruling on any unsettled or controversial question related to Islamic law. No statement made by a mufti shall be deemed a fatwa unless and until it is published in the Gazette. Once published, a fatwa is binding on every Muslim resident in the relevant territory or state as a dictate of their religion, and it becomes their religious duty to observe and uphold the fatwa — unless Islamic law allows personal deviation in matters of belief, observance or opinion. A fatwa is also recognised by the Shariah courts as authoritative on all matters addressed within it. (See, for example, Section 34 of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993.) By definition, a Muslim is a person who professes the religion of Islam. A person, in turn, includes a body of persons, corporate or unincorporated. (See Section 3 of the Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967.) Federal law includes legislation made by Parliament, while state law consists of legislation enacted by the State Legislative Assemblies. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa Another product of ijtihad is what is otherwise referred to as a ruling under the law. Take, for example, the rulings issued by the Shariah Advisory Council (SAC) of Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM). The SAC was established in May 1997 as the highest Shariah authority for Islamic financial institutions in Malaysia. Its roles and functions as the authoritative body for the ascertainment of Islamic law in the context of Islamic finance — which is supervised and regulated by BNM — were reinforced with the enactment of the Central Bank of Malaysia Act 2009 (CBA). (See Sections 51 and 52 of the CBA.) The SAC plays a pivotal role in ensuring the consistent application of Shariah rulings across Islamic financial institutions. These rulings serve as the primary reference to ensure end-to-end Shariah compliance in the structuring and implementation of financial products and activities. Crucially, Section 57 of the CBA makes these rulings binding on Islamic financial institutions. Furthermore, Section 58 of the CBA provides that SAC rulings 'shall prevail' over any ruling made by a Shariah body or committee of an Islamic financial institution. And so we arrive at this paradox: following the majority decision of the Federal Court in the Sisters in Islam Forum fatwa case, one product of ijtihad (a fatwa) does not bind companies, but another (a ruling) does. The majority reasoned that only a natural person can profess the religion of Islam. However, the judgment did not address the definition of 'person' under Section 3 of the Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967. (As noted above, 'person' includes corporate entities.) We respect the decision of the majority. But after years of legal proceedings, it is humbly submitted that we are not yet out of a legal quagmire. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
