Restore judiciary's standing as equal branch of govt

To ensure the judiciary remains independent at all times, Perikatan Nasional chief whip Takiyuddin Hassan urged the government to amend Article 121 of the Federal Constitution to its original form.
He said this would reinstate its position as an equal branch of the government.
'The government must also...

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Barnama

2 hours ago

• Barnama

AGC Rejects Claims Of 'Flawed Prosecution' After Najib's DNAA In Second SRC Case

KUALA LUMPUR, June 20 (Bernama) -- The Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) has dismissed as baseless allegations that it carried out a 'flawed prosecution' in the second SRC International Sdn Bhd case involving Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. In a statement, the AGC reiterated its firm commitment to upholding the rule of law and stated that it would continue to fulfill its responsibilities under the Federal Constitution with integrity, fairness and respect for the judicial process. However, the AGC acknowledged the decision by High Court Judge K Muniandy to grant Najib a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) on three charges of money laundering involving RM27 million in funds from the company. 'The case was registered in the High Court on Feb 7, 2019, and scheduled for trial on five occasions: June 2020, July to August 2021, March to April 2022, September 2024 and April to May 2025. 'However, all trial dates were postponed due to the Movement Control Order caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, requests by the defence, or applications by the prosecution itself,' the statement read. According to the statement, the prosecution's requests for postponement were due to the ongoing trial of the first SRC case, which proceeded at the High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court until its completion on March 31, 2023. At the same time, the trial proceedings for the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) case had also begun while the first SRC case was still ongoing. 'Both cases involved overlapping material documents required for the second SRC trial. 'As these documents were critical to the second SRC case, the prosecution had no choice but to wait until they were available, which was until the 1MDB trial proceedings were completed. 'It must be emphasised that the material documents are available but are currently being used as evidence in the ongoing 1MDB trial,' the AGC said.

New Straits Times

3 hours ago

• New Straits Times

A-GC denies flawed prosecution in Najib's SRC case, cites evidence constraints

KUALA LUMPUR: The Attorney-General's Chambers (A-GC) has refuted claims that the prosecution in the money laundering case involving funds from SRC International Sdn Bhd (SRC) was flawed. In a statement, the A-GC said it has consistently upheld the highest standards and quality in discharging its prosecutorial duties, in line with public expectations. "The A-GC 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 judicial processes," the statement read. The statement followed the High Court's decision to grant a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) to former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak over three money laundering charges involving RM27 million linked to SRC. High Court Judge K. Muniandy issued the ruling today after the prosecution failed to furnish the defence with hundreds of documents related to the trial, despite the charges being filed as early as 2019. Addressing the delay in trial proceedings, the A-GC said the case, first registered at the High Court in February 2019, was postponed on five occasions due to various factors, including the Covid-19 pandemic, defence requests and applications by the prosecution itself. The A-GC said that proceedings for the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) trial had commenced while the first SRC case was still ongoing at the High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court levels. This overlap led to delays in the second SRC trial, as both cases involved the use of key material documents required for the prosecution, it said. Following this, it said, there was no choice but to wait until the documents were made available. "Both cases involved the use of certain material documents that were also intended to be used in the second SRC trial. "As the documents in question are material to the second SRC trial, the prosecution had no choice but to wait until those documents became available, which is after the 1MDB trial proceedings have concluded. "It must be emphasised that the material documents are already available but are currently being used as evidence in the ongoing 1MDB trial," it said. The A-GC also said the prosecution had requested additional time to compile all the material documents to present them as evidence in the second SRC trial.

The Star

5 hours ago

• The Star

Najib's DNAA: Material documents unavailable because held up in 1MDB trial, says AGC

PETALING JAYA: All aspects will be examined and considered before taking any further action on the temporary discharge of Datuk Seri Najib Razak three counts of money laundering involving RM27mil linked to SRC International Sdn Bhd, says the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC). The AGC said there were some documents which were material for the current SRC International trial, and the prosecution had no choice but to wait until the relevant material documents were obtained after the 1MDB trial proceedings were 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 in a statement on Friday (June 20). "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. "The department is aware that this case has attracted public attention as it involves the former prime minister of Malaysia and throughout the proceedings before the Court, the department has taken action in accordance with the limits of the independence of the prosecution and the legal process. "The case was registered at the High Court on Feb 7, 2019 and has been set for trial five times in June 2020, July to August 2021, March to April 2022, September 2024 and April and May 2025." It said all trial dates of the case have been postponed for the following reasons: (i) Movement control order due to the Covid-19 pandemic; (ii) Application by the accused's counsel; or (iii) The prosecution's own application. The application for adjournment made by the prosecution is because (i) The trial proceedings of the first SRC case were still ongoing at that time at the High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court levels until fully completed on March 31, 2023; (ii) At the same time, the 1MDB trial proceedings had also begun while the first SRC case was still pending. Both cases above involved the use of some of the material documents that would be used in the second SRC trial. "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 the 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. Earlier, Judge K Muniandy allowed the defence's application for a DNAA over three money laundering charges involving RM27mil from SRC International Sdn Bhd, citing the prosecution's lack of preparedness to proceed with the trial, which has been postponed numerous times since 2019. The court was informed that the prosecution had yet to obtain the necessary documentary evidence. The delay, the judge noted, had denied the accused the right to a fair and timely resolution of the case. A DNAA means the accused is temporarily discharged from the charges but may still be prosecuted for the same offences in the future if the prosecution so decides.