SHAH ALAM (July 17): Malaysia's first corporate liability graft case, which involves offshore vessel support company Pristine Offshore Sdn Bhd, will continue to be heard in the Sessions Court here, following the High Court's dismissal on June 23 of the application filed by the company and its former director Chew Ben Ben to transfer the case to the High Court.

The case deals with the charge Pristine Offshore is facing under the new Section 17A of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2019 — which stated that a commercial organisation can be considered guilty if any of its employees and/or associates commit corruption for the benefit of the organisation. Chew has been charged with bribery under Section 16(b)(A) of the same Act for allegedly giving a bribe of RM321,350 to ensure that Pristine Offshore was awarded a subcontract from Petronas Carigali Sdn Bhd.

Chew is also formerly Datasonic Group Bhd's deputy managing director and largest shareholder with a 49% stake. He has been paring down his stake in the information and communications technology solutions group since he was charged in 2021, and earlier this month, he ceased to be a substantial shareholder of Datasonic by transferring his remaining shares to family members.

In dismissing their application, High Court judge Norsharidah Awang said Pristine Offshore and Chew had failed to show that the Session's Court judge Rozilah Salleh lack the competency or is incompatible to hear the matter, despite Pristine Offshore being the first in the country to be charged with corporate liability under the new section of the MACC Act 2019, saying Rozilah Salleh has been presiding graft cases since 2011.

“The learned Sessions judge has been in service for more than 30 years and should have experience in dealing with difficult cases due to competency for the adjudication on corruption matters. It was never mentioned in any of the affidavits in the motion to show the learned Sessions judge lack of such competency.

“There are no averments by both the applicants (Pristine Offshore and Chew) that the Sessions judge who would be trying this case was in any manner lacking in any of the judicial qualities. There is no question about the incompetence or incapability of the Sessions judge to deal with such issues should the matter arise,” Norsharidah said in her 18-page written judgement sighted by The Edge.

For these reasons, the High Court judge found that the application made to transfer the case under Section 417(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code to the High Court cannot be sustained and hence dismissed.

Pristine Offshore and Chew wanted the case to be heard at the High Court as they claimed that some question of law is likely to arise from the term “adequate procedures” contained in the new Section 17A of the MACC Act 2009 — which stated that a commercial organisation can be considered guilty if any of its employees and/or associates commit corruption for the benefit of the organisation — and that there is no precedent by any court in the country for the specified offence.

“The capability of Pristine Offshore under Section 17A of the Act is ambiguous if Chew is found guilty under a distinct and separate offence under Section 16(b)(B) of the same Act,” their application stated.

Pristine Offshore was charged on March 18, 2021, under Section 17A of the MACC Act 2009, which came into effect on June 1, 2020. The introduction of Section 17A enables the MACC to impose corporate liability on commercial organisations, including public and private limited companies, whose employees or associated persons are involved in corrupt practices or dishonest commercial misconduct. Pristine Offshore, through its director Datuk Abdul Kamal Mohd Mydeen, had claimed trial to the charge.

Both Pristine Offshore and Chew were represented by Bernard Francis, while deputy public prosecutors Low Chin Hew and Zander Lim Wai Keong appeared for the prosecution.

The Sessions Court has fixed Sept 19 for case management of the matter. It is understood, however, that Pristine Offshore and Chew have filed a notice of appeal over Norsharidah’s decision to the Court of Appeal.

Read also:
Offshore vessel company first to be charged with MACC Act's new corporate liability provision