PUTRAJAYA (Dec 11): Parties in the government’s appeal against Muar member of Parliament Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman’s acquittal for alleged misuse of Bersatu funds have been told to keep their arguments brief on the first day of oral submissions.
Court of Appeal (COA) President Datuk Abu Bakar Jais, leading the three-member panel, reminded both the prosecution and defence that judges are familiar with the law and have done their homework, eliminating the need for lengthy submissions.
"The fact of the matter is that we have read the High Court and Court Of Appeal grounds of judgement. We have also read the submissions by all parties. It is also the fact of the matter that the issues raised are issues we judges are accustomed to.
"We know the position of the law. It is not something that is alien to us. Therefore, with respect we do not think there is a clear need for lengthy oral submissions," he said at the onset of Thursday’s proceedings.
Thursday’s hearing focused on the prosecution’s case, while the defence will present on Friday.
Abu Bakar set a strict tone Thursday, asking prosecutors to focus on differences from their written submissions and watch their time.
Abu Bakar: The [more] you drag this, the lesser time you have for your oral submission. Conclude what is important to you as soon as possible.
How was the COA [findings] wrong? That is what we are interested in.
Deputy public prosecutor Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin: Thank you for the advice.
The panel, which also consisted of newly elevated apex court judges Datuk Che Ruzima Ghazali and Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah, were actively posing questions throughout submissions.
They took particular issue with the prosecution's representation of the COA decision which acquitted Syed Saddiq.
Wan Shaharuddin argued that the appellate court made “wild allegations” against the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and prosecution, claiming their key witness, Rafiq Hakim Razali, may have given his testimony under duress in order to appease the authorities to suit the prosecution’s case.
Abu Bakar: The court that said that or the defence counsel's contention?
Wan Shaharuddin: It was accepted completely (diterima bulat-bulat).
Abu Bakar: Where does it [show] it was accepted completely?
Wan Shaharuddin: There is no such evidence.
Abu Bakar: Kalau tiada, tiada la. It cannot be said that the court found that [Rafiq] had tailored his evidence to appease the MACC.
The panel highlighted that the COA judgement had examined Rafiq's testimony and "alluded" to his inconsistent testimony in court, and based on this, they found merit in the defence's argument that Rafiq "might" have tailored his testimony to fit the case. Abu Bakar stressed the word "might".
Syed Saddiq's court case has attracted much attention.
At the lower court, the COA panel also rebuked Wan Shaharuddin, similar to the Federal Court, saying that Wan Shaharuddin’s remark to ignore outside opinions was “a bit naughty and unnecessary”.
"The court never goes beyond this trial. This is purely based on the appeal record. We never consider any opinion outside the court," Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim, who led the panel, said.
Ahmad Zaidi said Wan Shahruddin's comments could be seen as disrespectful to the judiciary.
In June, the Court of Appeal (COA) overturned the High Court’s ruling and acquitted Syed Saddiq of four charges related to criminal breach of trust, misusing party funds and money laundering.
The funds involved belonged to Armada, Bersatu’s youth wing, which Syed Saddiq led from Sept 16, 2016 until May 2020.
He had originally been sentenced to seven years in prison, two strokes of the rotan and a RM10 million fine.
The two main charges were separate:
- Abetting Armada’s former assistant treasurer Rafiq to withdraw RM1 million of party funds in March 2020.
- Misusing RM120,000 from Armada Bumi Bersatu Enterprise (ABBE) in April 2018, which was transferred to Syed Saddiq’s personal account.
The other two charges of money laundering were linked to the second charge.