PUTRAJAYA (April 17): Muar Member of Parliament Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman may have produced receipts of his expenditure in the 2018 general election, but that does not show that the money was from his own funds, the Court of Appeal (COA) heard on Thursday.
Deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Farah Ezlin Yusop Khan argued this in the young politician's appeal against his conviction and sentencing in his criminal trial involving alleged misappropriation of funds from Armada, the youth wing of his former party Bersatu.
Farah's arguments focused solely on Syed Saddiq's misappropriation charge — framed under Section 403 of the Penal Code — which concerns alleged misuse of RM120,000 of party contributions belonging to Armada Bumi Bersatu Enterprise (ABBE) in April 2018. ABBE is a company set up to generate income for Armada through merchandise sales. The sum was transferred to Syed Saddiq's personal Maybank account.
The Malaysian United Democratic Alliance (Muda) co-founder has maintained that these monies were from two fundraising events and were reimbursements to his own monies spent on his campaign in Muar during the 14th general election in 2018.
Testifying in his defence in February 2023, Syed Saddiq said he had spent a total of RM171,675 for the election campaign, which he had declared to the Election Commission, as required by law.
On Thursday, the prosecution argued that there was no evidence indicating that the source of the money used in the campaign originated from Syed Saddiq’s personal funds.
Farah also highlighted that Syed Saddiq did not inform crucial witnesses — such as ABBE's sole account holder Rafiq Hakim Razali, who was also then-Armada assistant treasurer, and his then-private secretary Siti Nurul Hidayah — that the monies were a reimbursement until he was 'caught'.
The DPP added that hence, the defence that these monies were a reimbursement cannot hold water and was an afterthought.
The politician, who turns 33 this year, was also charged with two counts of money laundering involving two transactions of RM50,000 each — believed to be proceeds of unlawful activities — via his Maybank Islamic account and his Amanah Saham Bumiputera account in June 2018. This total of RM100,000 stems from the 'reimbursement'.
Panel reminds prosecution that they are aware not to be swayed by public opinion
Earlier during the appeal proceedings on Thursday, the panel, led by COA judge Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim, accompanied by COA judges Datuk Azman Abdullah and Datuk Noorin Badaruddin, reminded parties that they are aware that in a court of law, external opinions, besides hard facts and evidence, were immaterial.
This came about when lead prosecutor DPP Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin asked the panel to put aside opinions and comments of netizens regarding this case.
To this, judge Azman replied: "You don't have to remind us. This is the court of law; we have read all the evidence."
Wan Shahruddin primarily addressed Syed Saddiq's first charge, framed under Section 406 of the Penal Code, where he is accused of abetting Rafiq in committing criminal breach of trust over RM1 million linked to Armada in March 2020. The senior DPP again stressed that the panel should look at the case holistically, instead of in segregated segments.
Syed Saddiq has maintained that the RM1 million was not used for his own personal or individual benefit, but for party purposes. He has maintained that the RM1 million in this case was withdrawn in March 2020 and used for preparations to face the Covid-19 outbreak and also for Ramadan and Hari Raya, which were around the corner.
On Thursday, Wan Shaharuddin also argued that the sentence meted out by the High Court — a total of seven years in prison, two strokes of the rotan, and a fine of RM10 million — is one on the "lower side", given Syed Saddiq’s age, and ought to be maintained.
In this matter, Syed Saddiq is represented by prominent criminal counsel Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik and former solicitor general II Datuk Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.
The panel has reserved its decision, given the numerous issues raised. Case management has been slated for April 24 to set a judgement date.