Tuesday 11 Mar 2025
By
main news image

KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 12): The charges facing Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor's RM7.1 million trial are in line with the requirements of the law, the High Court heard on Tuesday.

The prosecution contended that there were sufficient details in the 17 charges in her money laundering and tax evasion case for her to mount a defence without prejudice.

"A charge is a notice to mount a defence. This is the way anti-money laundering charges have been drafted all the way. The charges are clear. There is nothing wrong," deputy public prosecutor Ahmad Akram Gharib said.

The prosecution is submitting its arguments against Rosmah's application to strike out the charges. Rosmah's lawyers contend that the charges are defective and bad in law, and that their client should be acquitted.

Akram argued that whatever raised by the defence in their submissions were premature, and were matters to be considered during the course of the trial for the court to make a determination.

"The findings of whether the charges have been proven should be made at the end of the prosecution's case. Not now. The evidence must be heard first," Akram said.

Following submissions, High Court judge K Muniandy set Dec 19 to deliver his decision on the application.

Rosmah first filed the application to strike out the charges in September last year, and it was first heard in December.

In this trial, Rosmah faces 17 charges involving RM7.1 million transferred into her personal bank account between 2013 and 2017.

On the first eight counts, she is charged with money laundering by directly engaging in a transaction involving proceeds of unlawful activities amounting to RM1.1 million that were deposited into her account.

On the ninth to 12th counts, she is charged with directly engaging in 227 transactions involving proceeds of unlawful activities totalling RM6 million, which were also deposited into her account.

On the 13th to 17th counts, she is charged with engaging in money laundering by failing to file a tax return on the sum that was deposited into her account as required under the Income Tax Act 1967.

Edited ByAniza Damis
      Print
      Text Size
      Share