The Malaysian Insight

THE prosecution in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption trial today questioned why it took the Umno president such a long time to claim immunity, during closing submissions in the case involving the misappropriations of Yayasan Akalbudi funds

Deputy public prosecutor Raja Rozela Raja Toran told the court it would be absurd to grant immunity to any accused who provides information to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

She also that it was false to say that the prosecution’s case depended on Zahid’s statement to the MACC as there was evidence from 89 civilian witnesses in the course of the trial, excluding the investigative officers.

Raja Rozela told Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah that Zahid’s immunity claim could not be heard by his court as it was not the proper forum.

Lead defence counsel Hisyam Teh Poh Teik has argued that Zahid should be granted immunity as he had made two statements to the MACC on July 2 and 3, 2018 and therefore protected under sub-section 30(7) of the MACC Act.

Raja Rozela today said that the defence cannot have a literal interpretation of the MACC Act.

“The scope and intention of subsection (7) should not be read in isolation but must be read harmoniously with other provisions of the act,” she said.

“The exemption from prosecution will not be given if the outcome of the investigation reveals that the person has committed an offence under this act.

“Therefore, the accused is not entitled to such a claim simply by virtue of having provided information to the MACC.”

The prosecution also asked why the defence did not raise the immunity claim at the earliest possible stage, especially when the charges were first read out in the Sessions Court on October 19, 2018.

“Later, when the case was transferred here on March 22, 2019, again, they didn’t raise the immunity claim, not even a squeak,” Raja Rozela said.

“It is odd for them to wait until the last minute for immunity to potentially cancel all charges.

“The trial has gone on for 55 days with 99 witnesses through two prime ministers, the movement control orders, Covid-19 pandemic, and the emergency proclamation.”

Raja Rozela also debunked the defence’s “mistaken belief” that the prosecution’s case rested solely on Zahid’s MACC statements. 

“We the prosecution did not rely on those statements to charge the accused, we rely on the 99 witnesses, and if you minus the investigative officers, then we have at least 89 civilian witnesses.

“And the other point to add is that neither the public prosecutor nor the MACC did anything to encourage the accused to believe that he would be given immunity.”

She said it would not be “sustainable” if the MACC were to only take down statements of corrupt activities and did not act against the wrongdoer.

The lawyer also said that the defence should have filed for a judicial review at the civil courts instead raising an immunity claim in a criminal trial court. 

Zahid, 68, is facing 12 charges of criminal breach of trust, eight of corruption, and 27 of money laundering involving tens of millions of ringgit belonging to the foundation.

If convicted, the Bagan Datuk MP could be jailed for up to 20 years and fined no less than five times the bribe amount or RM10,000, whichever is higher.

The defence yesterday concluded their nine days of oral submissions for all 47 of the accused’s charges.

Today’s hearing adjourned at 12.24pm and will resume October 4. – September 22, 2021.