Muhyiddin applies to transfer abuse of position, money laundering case to High Court
KUALA LUMPUR: Former Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has applied again to transfer the seven charges made against him for using his position to obtain bribes and receiving money from unlawful activities from the Sessions Court to the High Court.
His lawyer, Tang Jia Wearn, informed Sessions Court judge Azura Alwi that the hearing of the matter had been set for June 16 before High Court judge Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin and requested the Sessions Court to set the date for case management to know the status of the application.
Today was set for mention with the proceeding also attended by deputy public prosecutors Noralis Mat and Wan Nur Iman Wan Ahmad Afzal.
Earlier, Noralis informed the court that the prosecution had submitted the list of witnesses for the money laundering charge and documents related to the case today to the defence, and this was confirmed by Tang.
The court then set July 11 for case management, with Muhyiddin exempted from attending the proceeding.
In the application filed last April 4, Muhyiddin said there were complex legal issues and questions of unusual difficulty that were expected to arise, particularly regarding the constitutionality of several provisions in the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009.
According to the Bersatu president, the case in question was of public interest that had attracted the attention of the general public and received extensive media coverage at home and abroad, and it would not cause any prejudice to the prosecution if the application was allowed.
On April 27, 2023, Muhyiddin had filed an application to transfer the case from the Sessions Court to the High Court, but on July 10 of the same year, he withdrew the application.
Muhyiddin, 77, as the Prime Minister (at the time) and Bersatu president was charged with four counts of using his position to obtain bribes totalling RM232.5 million in connection with the Jana Wibawa Project from three companies, namely Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, Nepturis Sdn Bhd and Mamfor Sdn Bhd, as well as Datuk Azman Yusoff, for the party.
He was charged with committing the offence at the Prime Minister's Office, Bangunan Perdana Putra, the Federal Government Administration Centre in Putrajaya between March 1, 2020 and August 20, 2021.
The Pagoh Member of Parliament also faces three charges of receiving proceeds from illegal activities totalling RM200 million from Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, which were deposited into Bersatu's Ambank and CIMB Bank accounts.
The offence was allegedly committed at separate locations at AmBank, Amcorp Mall branch, Petaling Jaya on Jan 7, 2022 and CIMB Bank, Menara KL Branch, Jalan Stesen Sentral, here between February 25 and July 16, 2021 and February 8 and July 8, 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysiakini
11 hours ago
- Malaysiakini
Why charge Najib if not ready, Puad questions AGC's credibility
Umno supreme council member Puad Zarkashi questioned the Attorney-General's Chambers' credibility following the High Court's decision to grant former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA). 'Why did the three attorney-generals charge Najib if they were not ready. Where is the AGC's credibility? 'Six years through three AGs.
Free Malaysia Today
a day ago
- Free Malaysia Today
6 judges honoured with rare elevation ceremony in Penang
The six judges with presiding senior Justice Rozana Ali Yusoff after the elevation ceremony at the High Court in George Town. GEORGE TOWN : Six High Court judges were honoured at a rare judicial elevation ceremony here today, reviving a long-standing tradition with roots dating back over two centuries. Today's ceremony presided over by senior judge Justice Rozana Ali Yusoff was the first to honour six judges at once. They were: Quay Chew Soon, Anand Ponnudurai, Azizan Arshad, Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James, Fathiyah Idris and Rofiah Mohamad. Penang Bar chair Gowri Subbaiyah said the elevation ceremony usually takes place only when judicial commissioners are confirmed as High Court judges, 'which usually takes two to three years'. However, some among the six judges had been confirmed over the past three years but had not been formally recognised. 'Since they are still serving here, we felt it was only right to include them,' she said. It is understood that the elevation ceremony was last held in 2017, when Justice Lim Chong Fong, now a judge at the Court of Appeal, was elevated to the High Court. After today's ceremony, Justice St James described his confirmation as both humbling and liberating. 'I'm beholden to no one now. Only to God, my oath, the Constitution, and the rule of law,' he said. Justice Quay said his time in Penang had been both challenging and rewarding. 'I've enjoyed the cases, especially the complex ones, as they test the mind. And I've enjoyed the food and the people even more,' he said, adding that Penang was 'the best station a judge could hope for'. Justice Fathiyah paid tribute to the senior lawyers who helped her grow when she was a sessions court judge in Ipoh. Justice Anand, best known for his work in employment law, said the variety of cases in Penang had pushed him to grow. 'I've had to learn Acts of Parliament I never knew existed. And it's been worth it,' he said. 'My guiding rule is simple. I must be honest with myself. If I sign a judgment, it's because I believe it's the right decision.' The elevation ceremony is believed to have its beginnings in 1808 when the colonial settlement received its charter of justice, which led to the founding of the first formal court. Elevation ceremonies used to include a procession where judges would walk in full regalia from St George's Church to the court building. Although public processions are no longer held, the 'ceremonial spirit lives on', according to lawyer T Tharumarajah, who said the ceremony is aimed at introducing new judges to the public. It also serves as a bridge between the bar and the bench. He said: 'Judges and lawyers are meant to engage (with one another), not keep apart. But after the scandals that rocked the judiciary in the early 2000s, that bond weakened. It shouldn't be that way.'
New Straits Times
a day 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.
