KUALA LUMPUR (June 10): Muhammad Yusoff Rawther will not be attending the prosecution’s appeal against his acquittal at the Court of Appeal that is scheduled to be heard on Monday (June 15).
This is because he is in the United Kingdom and his passport has been withheld by the UK authorities as he is seeking asylum there on humanitarian grounds.
However, his counsel Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali informed the media at a press conference on Wednesday afternoon that Yusoff had instructed him to proceed with the hearing of the prosecution’s appeal.
“I have written to Court of Appeal President Datuk Seri Abu Bakar Jais on June 2 to ask for the hearing of the appeal to proceed as scheduled without Yusoff’s attendance. I have also informed the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) with regards to this matter.
“However, till today, we have yet to receive any response from Abu Bakar. Despite this, I have instructions to proceed with the prosecution’s hearing of the appeal,” he added.
The lawyer explained that the appellate court has the power to proceed in hearing the appeal without Yusoff's attendance under Section 314C of the Criminal Procedure Code, as this has been done before.
Section 314 deals with the non-appearance of a respondent, which is, in this case, an accused person, during a criminal appeal where Sub Section (2) stipulates that if the service cannot be effected on the person, the court shall proceed to hear the appeal in his absence.
Rafique said he was informed by Yusoff on June 1 with regard to his passport being held by the British authorities as a result of his application for asylum.
He explained that his client has fear for his safety following his acquittal over drug trafficking and fake-pistol charges, as there are police reports that have been lodged against him alleging that he (Yusoff) is a foreign agent.
The lawyer explained that Yusoff had left Malaysia since his acquittal on June 12, last year, to continue his studies in the UK. He has applied for asylum for fear of his safety following allegations he made against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and his former aide Datuk Seri Farhash Wafa Salvador Mubarak Ali.
Yusoff acquitted in June last year
Rafique said that despite the uncertainty in Abu Bakar’s reply and the AGC noting that they have received the information, he would go to court on Monday asking the bench to proceed with the prosecution’s appeal.
Yusoff was acquitted without his defence being called by High Court judge Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin on the charges of trafficking of 300.1 grammes of cannabis and possession of fake pistols.
The drug charge under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 is punishable under Section 39B(2) of the same act, which carries a life sentence and also whipping of not less than 12 lashes, if convicted.
For the charge of possession of fake pistols, Yusoff faced a maximum imprisonment term of a year or a maximum fine of up to RM5,000, or both, if he had been found guilty under Section 36(1) of the Arms Act 1960).
In acquitting Yusoff, Jamil recognised that cannabis is a dangerous drug and the pistols were fake, but ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove custody and control over the two, despite the car in which the items were found belonging to Yusoff.
“As a result, this court discharges and acquits Yusoff without his defence being called,” the judge said, adding that the court noted that Yusoff had made a complaint and lodged a police report several days after the arrest, alleging that he could be a victim of being entrapped (perangkap) by Anwar.
Rafique questions outcome of Yusoff’s police report
At the press conference, Yusoff’s lawyer also questioned the outcome of the police probe into his client’s report, in which Yusoff alleged that he believed that he had been entrapped by Anwar and Farhash with regards to the drug trafficking and fake-pistols charges.
Rafique said that since Yusoff lodged the report in September 2024, there has been no development on the outcome of the investigations and the last update they received from the inspector general of police was that the investigation papers are still with the AGC.
“There has been no development on the outcome, and Yusoff is fearing for his life and safety, as [his] allegation is against the top leader of the country, and he had described his period while being held in prison and police remand for the drug trafficking charge before his acquittal as ‘hell’.”
“I reiterate that Yusoff is not afraid to face the appeal, but is merely worried or concerned about his safety. If the police could complete its probe against former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki within a month, and the AG’s Chambers could issue a statement today that there is no further action, then, why there is no outcome with regards to Yusoff’s allegations on entrapment?” the lawyer added.
He said there were strange occurrences with regards to the authorities in the country following the abduction and disappearance of businesswoman Datuk Pamela Ling, and the death of a 45-year-old civil servant at the Treasury Office on March 5, last year, that have both not been resolved.
For these reasons and the police report lodged against Yusoff by PKR members on his acquittal, Rafique said his client is afraid for his safety.
Outcome of Yusoff’s civil case
When asked whether Yusoff was prepared to return to Malaysia to testify against Anwar in his civil suit for sexual assault, Rafique replied that he was at the press conference only to respond to questions regarding his client’s criminal case.
“Furthermore, there is a pending application made by Anwar before the court, and I would not want to respond on this [civil court] issue,” the lawyer said.
Yusoff, who had previously been an aide to Anwar, had filed a suit against the prime minister, alleging that the PKR president and then-Opposition leader had sexually assaulted him in 2018.
The prime minister has also filed a pre-trial application to the suit, to be decided first; namely several issues concerning Yusoff's movement and presence at Anwar's private residence on the day of the alleged assault — to be decided either via affidavit or through in-camera (private) proceedings — and claims that the determination of these issues could potentially dispose of the entire case.
Anwar’s application has been fixed for hearing on Aug 4.
With regards to the possible outcome on June 15 at the Court of Appeal, Rafique, who attended the press conference with lawyer Afiq Rosli, said the court can either continue to hear the prosecution’s appeal, or possibly issue an arrest warrant against Yusoff.
However, the lawyer does not want to speculate on the matter as it is pending.
To a question on the possibility that the hearing would proceed and the appellate court might overturn the High Court’s decision and order Yusoff to enter his defence, and whether Yusoff would then return, Rafique said that he would not want to speculate on the outcome, but said that his client would have to deal with the matter if the defence is called.