Legal fraternity slams chambers' move in Guan Eng case

Bede Hong Bede Hong Updated 7 years ago · Published on 4 Sep 2018 5:31PM · 9 Comments

Constitutional lawyer Lim Wei Jiet says the AGC should have given the MACC a chance to respond to its decision to drop the case. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, September 4, 2018.

THE Attorney-General’s Chambers’ (AGC) failure to notify and consult enforcement agencies before dropping all charges against Lim Guan Eng showed a lack of professionalism and accountability, said legal experts.

Attorney-General Tommy Thomas should have also clarified why prosecutors withdrew from Guan Eng’s corruption trial, despite recusing himself from the case.

Until yesterday’s acquittal by the Penang High Court, Guan Eng had been on trial for buying a bungalow for below market price from his former landlady, Phang Li Khoon, in 2016, when he was Penang chief minister.

“However noble the AGC’s intention was, it can’t be denied that it should have executed its duties more professionally and handled its public relations image in better fashion,” said constitutional lawyer Lim Wei Jiet.

Lim said the AGC should have given the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission a chance to respond to its decision to drop the case.

“If the AGC decides to drop charges anyway, then all is fine. But these procedures that promote accountability and transparency must be complied with,” said Lim.

“Again, these best practices are all provided for under the UK’s Prosecution Guidance. Presumably, these were not done, leading to MACC’s ‘shocking’ press release.”

The MACC, as well as Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, both expressed “shock” yesterday at news of the withdrawal of the case.

Prosecutors had applied for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal but justice Hadhariah Syed Ismail granted a discharge amounting to full acquittal.

With a discharge amounting to full acquittal, Lim Guan Eng cannot be charged for the same offence due to the protection against double jeopardy in Article 7 of the Federal Constitution. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, September 4, 2018.

This meant that, even if with a new public prosecutor, Guan Eng cannot be charged for the same offence due to the protection against double jeopardy in Article 7 of the Federal Constitution.

Lim said that the AGC, notably the solicitor-general, should reveal its reasons for discontinuing its prosecution against Lim, who was appointed finance minister when Pakatan Harapan took over Putrajaya after the 14th general election.

“The public is entitled to know why charges against him have been dropped since this is a high-profile case. Particularly because former attorney-general Apandi Ali was overzealous in his prosecution of Guan Eng,” he said.

Lim said unless the AGC could show that the prosecution’s case was flawed, the matter showed “a serious lack of accountability and transparency”.

Earlier today, deputy public prosecutor Hanafiah Zakaria responded to growing criticism against the acquittal by saying that the decision to drop all charges was made after considering evidence from prosecution witnesses.

Hanafiah said dropping the charges was done “without influence from any quarters”, adding that he had kept his decision confidential from both Thomas and the MACC.

However, pro-transparency grouping Cenbet earlier said Thomas should have explained the Chambers’ decision.

“The need for answers is more pressing considering that the case has been in court for more than two years now, and the decision to withdraw charges was made a few months after the new government took over,” its vice-president, Simon Lim Cheng Hai, said.

Failure by Attorney-General Tommy Thomas to give a satisfactory explanation will only fuel public suspicion and lend credence to the notion of political interference, says one lawyer. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, September 4, 2018.

“Tommy Thomas owes the public an explanation. Failure by the attorney-general to give a satisfactory explanation will only fuel public suspicion and lend credence to the notion of political interference, which the new administration can do without. The attorney-general should urgently clear the air over this.”

Cenbet also supported proposals to grant the MACC prosecutorial powers and expediting the process of making the agency answerable to Parliament, in a bid for greater transparency.

Criminal lawyer Rajsurian Pillai said with the latest development in Guan Eng’s case, public confidence would likely “take a hit with recent events that seems to be incredibly partisan” to the ruling government.

He called for the office of the attorney-general and public prosecutor to be separated.

“The public prosecutor should be free to charge and conduct cases without fear of repercussions from political superiors.

“While charges on current government-friendly parties are being dropped, charges are being mounted on parties friendly with the past government,” said Rajsurian. – September 4, 2018.

Sign up or sign in here to comment.

Comments

  • When you look at the fabricated evidence that are so weak, you know it is a political motivated charge. Only a brave DPP will make such decision to drop the case. Say whatever you like.

    Posted 7 years ago by SY Loh · Reply

  • This lawyer here is splitting hair . AGC already explained why the charges were dropped . Thomas refused himself . So why the persistently I. Demam

    Posted 7 years ago by Jacob Hong · Reply

  • Seems to me this guy got to say something just to show that he is proactive in this matter. But he really sounded like empty gong ..

    Posted 7 years ago by Jacob Hong · Reply

  • Dont understand the people complaining.When the previous Govt was victimizing some of the opposition MPs they complained about injustice.
    Now when the new Govt has taken over and they reviewed the charges they found that it cannot stand in court they are doing the right thing to withdraw the charges to reverse the injustice.

    Posted 7 years ago by Padmanathan Maniam · Reply

  • Where were you when Apandi said no case against Najib?

    Posted 7 years ago by Sze wee chong · Reply

  • MACC should have long prepared for such a verdict. The shocking press statement and even TDM's shock are all uncalled for. By expressing shock, they simply want to tell the world "I am not involved", a shrew and cowardly way to shed responsibility.

    Posted 7 years ago by Tanahair Ku · Reply

  • So called " Legal experts" , bloody morons. AG Thomas had already reclused himself , you idiots. He does not have to explain to kedai kopi lawyers like Lim Wei Jiet. In Australia , this case would have never gone to court with shitty evidence from the moronic BN government whose main goal was to bring down DAP.

    Posted 7 years ago by Aran Thillainathan · Reply

  • This Lim Wei Jiet is trying to make his name famous by making noise so that the public notice him. Actually he has shown to the public he's an empty gong and has motives. So you've become a laughing stock now!

    Posted 7 years ago by Jordan Lee · Reply

  • Agree. An opportunistic tin kosong.

    Posted 7 years ago by Ramli Sirap · Reply