KUALA LUMPUR (May 28): The High Court (Appellate and Special Powers Division) has fixed July 1 to deliver its decision on whether to grant leave (permission) sought by lawyer Rosli Dahlan to challenge the decision by the police and government to freeze four of his Amanah Saham Nasional Bhd (ASNB) accounts on suspicion of them being used for money-laundering activities.
Judge Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh set the date after hearing submissions from Datuk DP Naban and Harvinderjit Singh, who appeared for Rosli, and senior federal counsel (SFC) Rahazlan Affandi Abdul Rahim, who appeared for the police and government.
Rosli had named five policemen, including Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Razarudin Husain and commercial crime director Datuk Seri Ramli Mohammed Yoosuf, along with the police, Attorney General Datuk Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh, deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Muhammad Zulfadli Mohd Nawawi, and the Malaysian government as respondents.
He sought a release of the freezing of four of his ASNB accounts, which are allegedly subject to money-laundering investigations.
The lawyer had initially obtained leave in his first judicial review application to challenge the authorities’ decision to freeze his bank accounts, subjecting him to remand, and a travel ban on visiting Singapore for a wedding.
Naban in his submissions on Tuesday to obtain leave told the court that the entire investigation against Rosli is mala fide (made in bad faith), as the lawyer has nothing to do with the dispute between two different entities (companies).
“Although the police report amounted to a dispute between the two parties, the authorities decided to freeze all his accounts that also included four of his ASNB accounts. Our position is that the freezing order is defective, as the police report lodged does not state his name,” Naban said.
The dispute between two parties is a complaint lodged by AirAsia against i-Serve.
The lawyer added that Rosli was picked up and held overnight, and a remand was applied but rejected, and no statement was taken against him.
Naban said that for any attempt now to seize the said accounts, the public prosecutor must satisfy the test under Section 50 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Amla), which is above Section 54, to freeze an asset.
“We submit that in their (public prosecutor's) affidavit, they themselves did not exercise any judgement call, and hence, this application is amenable to a judicial review,” the lawyer added.
Harvinderjit Singh, meanwhile, also questioned whether the police had completed its investigation prior to the freezing and seizure order being issued on his client.
He said the authorities cannot freeze the accounts first and investigate later, as this is not the purpose of the legislature.
“Here, the Attorney General Chambers through its DPP Muhammad Zulfadli did say that the investigations into the accounts are still being conducted. The investigating officer must be satisfied that the movable property is the subject matter of the action. Here, we say it is not, and hence leave should be granted,” he added.
SFC Rahazlan, who is objecting to the court in granting leave, said criminal investigations are not amenable to a judicial review, and hence such action should be dismissed.
He further said that Rosli should not have filed this judicial review application, but should have filed a private law action (civil suit), and not a public law action to challenge the authorities.
“The collateral purpose of this legal action is to disrupt action of the investigating authorities, and hence this court should not allow it,” he said, adding that the respondents had also filed an appeal against another High Court decision to grant leave for the merits of Rosli's judicial review application to be heard.
“The issuance of a seizure order is to preserve evidence for criminal prosecution under the Amla,” he added.
In judicial review proceedings, leave has to be granted first, before the merits of a challenge against the authorities are heard. This is to make sure the application is not frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of the court process.
In April, judge Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid granted leave to Rosli for his first judicial review application, following the authorities' move to freeze his bank accounts, imposing a travel ban, and also arresting him.