SOME observers feel the prosecution’s move to drop the charges against Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has damaged the image of the reform-driven unity government. 

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia’s Mazlan Ali and Umno Supreme Council member Lokman Adam said the decision to discharge Zahid was made according to law.

They said the government could not be accused of having a say as there were previous cases where opposition leaders were set free from graft charges.

Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah yesterday granted Zahid a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) on all 47 counts involving criminal breach of trust, corruption, and money laundering in relation to Yayasan Akalbudi funds after the prosecution halted proceedings on the grounds that it intended to conduct a more in-depth investigation into the case. 

Zahid, 70, was slapped with the charges in late 2018 and early 2019. 

A total of 114 witnesses were called to testify in the trial, which started on November 18, 2019 and lasted 77 days. 

After 99 prosecution witnesses testified, the High Court on January 24, 2022 ordered Zahid to enter his defence on all 47 charges. He was among 15 defence witnesses who testified. 

“Of course, the opposition will use this in their campaign in Johor; more or less, this will influence Malay voters in Johor, but this is normal,” said Mazlan. 

“If the court finds that there is no case or lack of evidence, the judge will use his discretion to acquit the accused.

“Let us not forget, Muhyiddin Yassin was acquitted too; Musa Aman and Abdul Azeez Rahim – all of them were acquitted and that happened not during Anwar Ibrahim’s time.”

Lokman felt Zahid’s acquittal would not reflect negatively on the unity government.

He went on to say there was enough proof to show that Zahid’s graft trial was politically motivated.

“We must not forget that there were two cases of leaked memos involving Najib Razak and Zahid Hamidi. In those memos, it was stated that the DPP together with the investigation officer had said there was not enough evidence on them.”

“It shows that all this while, the charges against Zahid and Najib were politically motivated and it was selective prosecution,” said the former PKR man.

Lokman believed the matter would not cause a public backlash. 

“If there are going to be noises, it would come from Perikatan Nasional. They have to remember, Idrus Harun was appointed by Muhyiddin, and Idrus – at the end of his career – did the right thing.”  

“The government does not need to answer the narrative; the AGC made the decision and needs to answer. The government does not need to because it was not their decision.” 

 Reformasi going ‘down the drain’

Abdul Razak Ismail, however, has lost trust in Anwar despite being a staunch supporter for decades.

The former Otai Reformis founder said the DNAA on Zahid was merely a political move. 

“Reformasi is down the drain; we have sold our principles. Reformasi is dead. 

“No one in the government has the right to talk about good governance anymore. Next, we will see Najib being pardoned. 

“For me, this is a political game. Anwar wants Umno to survive in order for him to stay in power,” said Razak.  

Transparency International Malaysia (TI-M) also expressed disappointment over the prosecution’s decision. 

Its president, Muhammad Mohan Abdullah said the AGC has the responsibility to explain it to the people.

“This discharge was made following the application by the prosecution to discontinue the trial against Zahid in line with the Attorney General’s powers under article 145 of the Federal Constitution and Section 254 of the Criminal Procedure Code.”

“This decision comes as a shock to many Malaysians as this is a high-profile case and the prosecution had already established a prima facie case resulting from 99 witnesses being called to testify in court.

“The prosecution has given 11 reasons for making this application, but they are too technical for ordinary Malaysians to understand. The AGC now has the responsibility to explain fully and frankly to all Malaysians why the prosecution took this decision instead of allowing the trial to continue its course until final judgment,” Mohan said.

Mohan added that without proper explanation, the people’s trust in the independence of the AGC would falter.

“It should also be noted that if no new charges are filed, the accused can apply for a full acquittal within the next few months.”

Mohan agreed with Bersih’s suggestion that the government should review the separation of roles between attorney general and public prosecutor.

“Generally understood, the attorney general acts as an adviser to the government of the day whilst the public prosecutor has a role to act independently in criminal cases in the best interest of the public to ensure that justice is served and criminal acts are punished.”

“Having both these functions under one individual gives rise in some cases to a possible ‘perceived conflict of interest’, thus TI-M repeats its call to the government to consider this institutional reform to separate these roles as soon as possible,” he stressed. – September 5, 2023.