Should Zahid Hamidi get an ACQUITTAL - NO, he should not because it is a FACT that he is no longer facing any criminal charge or criminal trial. He has already been DISCHARGED - that makes him just like any ordinary person who always face the RISK that he/she may be charged anytime in the future for some criminal offence.
So, will a NO FURTHER ACTION(NFA) pronouncement by a sitting Public Prosecutor/Attorney General of some investigation only be a JUSTIFICATION for the accused to apply to court for an ACQUITTAL? No, Zahid is different because he was already charged and then DISCHARGED (no more charge against him) but he can still again be charged for the same charge on some later date. BUT, in my opinion, it matters not because at present, Zahid is a FREE man with no charges against him in court...
Further, in Zahid's case, the prosecution has already proven a PRIMA FACIE case against him, and in such a situation, in my opinion, he can only be ACQUITTED only if can 'rebut, explain - really raise a Reasonable Doubt' to the Court(The Judge must be convinced) - thus, just because the current Public Prosecutor/Attorney General decided on a NFA, or even if he comes to court and says that 'he does not intend to charge Zahid again' - I believe that Zahid and/or similar EX-ACCUSED has no right to be gifted with an ACQUITTAL. All they justly should get is a DISCHARGE...
Section 180(4) of the Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code says, 'For the purpose of this section, a prima facie case is made out against the accused where the prosecution has adduced credible evidence proving each ingredient of the offence which if unrebutted or unexplained would warrant a conviction.
This AG/PP may not want to charge Zahid again, or decided to stop all INVESTIGATION(NFA) but some future AG/PP may decide otherwise - which may lead to proving Zahid GUILTY - just like what happened to Najib
No charges will be brought against Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak based on the investigations carried out by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). Attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali said he has studied the investigation papers and was satisfied that there are no grounds for action."Based on the facts and evidence as a whole, I, as the public prosecutor, am satisfied that no criminal offence has been committed by the prime minister in relation to the three investigation papers."I will return the relevant investigation papers to MACC today, with the instruction to close the three investigation papers," he told a press conference in Putrajaya this morning. - - Malaysiakini,26/1/2016
That decision of then AG/PP to close investigation papers is equivalent of the "NFA" - now what is NFA, it means a 'temporary halt' because possibly active investigation is not able to find relevant evidence - it does not mean that it is the END of investigation - for investigation will proceed again if new evidence/witness surfaces - CRIMINAL cases are 'always open' ...
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said a total of 41 out of 60 investigation papers on criminal cases involving politicians opened between 2020 and July this year have been classified as no further action (NFA). According to Free Malaysia Today (FMT), Azalina told the Dewan Negara that such cases could still be reopened if new developments arise. -Malay Mail, 4/9/2025
BN threat to leave MADANI? NFA by AG/PP Dusuki(Unnecessary)? Now Zahid trying for ACQUITTAL? Remove RISK of next AG/PP re-charging Zahid? Are Malaysian Public Prosecutors obedient to the PM?
When Tommy Thomas became Attorney General, or when Latifa Koya became MACC Chief ... the investigation against Najib, once closed(or NFAed by a sitting AG/PP Appandi) came alive again, and that led to Najib to be charged, tried and ultimately convicted and sentenced. THIS IS A LESSON MALAYSIA MUST LEARN...so that criminals(even powerful politicians) no longer escape JUSTICE ...
DUSUKI(current AG/PP) may feel that Zahid is INNOCENT - which may be absurd because Prosecution already proved to court(Judge Colin Sequerah) a PRIMA FACIE CASE
DUSUKI might believe the Investigation against Zahid had hit a 'road-block and is not making headway' - but that does not mean that 'new developments may arise' - AGAIN, the question is what INVESTIGATION is this - as prosecution already proved a PRIMA FACIE case - and if there evidence that Zahid is NOT GUILTY, the prosecution too is duty bound to submit to court who will RIGHTLY make the needed COURT DECISION [One must be reminded that the Prosecution is also duty bound to submit to court all evidence including that which is favourable to Zahid Hamidi too)
Section 51A(1)(c) Criminal Procedure Code is clear ' (c) a written statement of facts favourable to the defence of the accused signed under the hand of the Public Prosecutor or any person conducting the prosecution....' Yes, in Malaysia, the Prosecution cannot hide evidence even that which is favourable to the Defence - in this case, that may make Zahid not guilty??? In Malaysia, prosecution should never hide the TRUTH > ...
So, again the fact, that Prosecution SUCCEEDED in proving to Court a PRIMA FACIE case -- raises a LOT of questions why the AG/PP decide not to continue the criminal trial - and then seems OK that Zahid was Discharged[DNAAed] - the suggested MACC needed more time to investigate matters raised in letters...but why was this not raised in Court?
Should a sitting AG/PP's decision that he will not RE-CHARGE Zahid, or he has no plans to continue other criminal trials in the future that have been stopped mid-way(almost always before the close of prosecution's case, before Court decides a Prima Facie case) give the Court the reason to ACQUIT - meaning never again be charged for the same charge even if CONCRETE evidence of Guilt emerge....a GROSS INJUSTICE...
In my opinion, whenever the prosecution decides to STOP or discontinue criminal trials, the Court should only grant a DISCHARGE(DNAA) to the accussed - which puts the accussed back to status quo with any others in Malaysia, who reasonably is always at risk of being charged of some crime or another...???
ACQUITTAL must be handed out only at the END of the FAIR Criminal Trial after court considers all evidence and arguments of BOTH sides... {But, then there is the possibility that the Prosecutor was bad and made mistake, and also we have a BAD Judge ...}.
ACQUITTAL at the close of prosecution's case where the prosecution fails to prove PRIMA FACIE case is also of concern {maybe again bad prosecutor and/or judge}
In every other situation, like in Zahid Hamidi's case now, there should be NO ACQUITTAL - just a DISCHARGE is sufficient.
ODD, why is the Judge presiding over Zahid Hamidi's attempt to be ACQUITTED not Colin Sequerah, that TRIAL JUDGE who decided on PRIMA FACIE case, and also heard all subsequent Defence witnesses - WHY Justice Nurulhuda Nuraini Nor and NOT trial judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah?
Justice Nurulhuda Nuraini Nor was scheduled to hear the matter today, but deputy public prosecutor Badius Zaman Ahmad asked for an adjournment as the cause papers were only served on the AGC last Friday (Jan 30).“We need to file an affidavit in reply,” he said, adding that the prosecution needed two weeks. Nurulhuda then fixed Feb 24 to hear the matter. - FMT, 3/2/2026
On Sept 4, 2024, trial judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah granted Zahid a DNAA on 47 charges of corruption, money laundering and criminal breach of trust to allow further investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.The judge previously ruled that the prosecution had established a prima facie case on all charges. Zahid and several other defence witnesses had given evidence when the AGC applied for the DNAA.
prosecution had established a prima facie case on all charges - what does this mean?
THEREFORE, in his criminal trial - the TRIAL JUDGE decided that the Prosecution succeeded in proving a PRIMA FACIE case, not for some charges only BUT all 47 charges...Section 180(4) of the Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code says, 'For the purpose of this section, a prima facie case is made out against the accused where the prosecution has adduced credible evidence proving each ingredient of the offence which if unrebutted or unexplained would warrant a conviction.
So, if the Defence (accussed Zahid Hamidi) fails to adduce evidence at all - Zahid would have been convicted and sentenced for all 47 Charges....
If Zahid Hamidi had adduced evidence by calling witnesses - then the Trial Judge will consider WHETHER whether Zahid had managed to REBUT any charges(or some charges) or ALL charges and RAISED REASONABLE DOUBT. If he managed to raised reasonable doubt for 1 charge, he will be acquitted for 1 charge, if 5, he will be acquitted for 5 ....and if he managed to raise reasonable doubt for all 47 charges - he will be acquitted for all 47 charges...
It must be pointed out, that the person that must be CONVINCED is the Trial Judge ....not the prosecutor, not anyone else...
BUT, in the Zahid Hamidi's case - it was the Public Prosecutor/Attorney General who decided that he did not want to continue criminal prosecution...so, the criminal trial could not proceed to its very end...
Some say - we cannot force the Public Prosecutor to continue. Should we then just let the TRIAL to continue without the Public Prosecutor? After all, it is the JUDGE who has to be convinced as to whether he is GUILTY or not - and Judges too have the power to ask witnesses questions - and Judges decide what questions can be asked, and also the WEIGHT to be given to evidence adduced...IT IS POSSIBLE - Should Malaysia consider this as an option?
Why did the Public Prosecutor/Attorney General decide to stop the TRIAL - was it a 'political'? That is what some may suspect, for our Prime Minister wants(or needs) the BN's 30 MPs in his MADANI government and if Zahid's case proceeded and he was convicted and sentenced - would that lead to 'break-up' of the MADANI government?? So, was the decision to stop trial from proceeding to the end influenced by politics????
In Malaysia, any Public Prosecutor/Attorney General can be removed at any time - PM Anwar is PM for slightly more than 3 years > and this is the 3rd Public Prosecutor/Attorney General?? We recall how a former Public Prosecutor/Attorney General was removed days before his retirement by Najib - and there was suspicion that his 'early removal' may be linked with possibility that he was 'thinking' about charging Najib for the 1MDB case... mere suspicion, and we will never know what happened in that Gani Patail situation.
We then have to recall Appandi Ali, the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor who decided that Najib committed no crime in the IMDB case --- but then a subsequent Attorney General/Public Prosecutor TOMMY Thomas decided otherwise and charged Najib for the 1MDB cases - and NOW we know that Appandi Ali was WRONG and Tommy RIGHT - for Najib was found guilty, convicted and sentenced by the Court after FULL Trial...
If the previous Attorney General/Public Prosecutor Gani had charged Najib - would we have seen subsequent Attorney General/Public Prosecutor Appandi also have discontinued that criminal trial??
Let us be remember some of the things that happened in Zahid Hamidi's case before he got the DNAA? The lead Prosecutor, Raja Rozela, was suddenly replaced by Dusuki Mokhtar(who happened to be the current Attorney General/Public Prosecutor)..
A Pejuang leader has urged Attorney-General Idrus Harun to explain why Raja Rozela Raja Toran has been dropped as the lead deputy public prosecutor (DPP) in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption trial...With Zahid’s Yayasan Akalbudi case now at the defence stage, Rafique pointed out that Raja Rozela had been handling the case from the start and was successful in establishing a prima facie case against the Umno president....“So, why the need to replace the lead deputy public prosecutor now? - FMT, 8/8/2023
Idrus added that deputy public prosecutor Dusuki Mokhtar will take over as the lead prosecutor in Zahid’s case. The attorney-general said Dusuki had extensive experience as a deputy public prosecutor for nearly 30 years now and had handled high-profile cases even at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court. - FMT, 8/8/2023
If
DPP Raja Rozela Raja Toran continues to prosecute, Zahid Hamidi will
likely be convicted and sentenced? Come back and prosecute to the end..
If DPP Raja Rozela Raja Toran continues to prosecute, Zahid Hamidi will likely be convicted and sentenced? Come back and prosecute to the end..
Datuk Raja Rozela Raja Toran was among nine judicial commissioners who received their letters of appointment from Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat today. ... Raja Rozela had been the lead prosecutor for two of Zahid's trials involving the misappropriation of funds belonging to Yayasan Akalbudi (YAB) and the 40 charges of corruption in connection with the Foreign Visa System (VLN).On Aug 8, the New Straits Times confirmed that Raja Rozela, 58, had been -year-old was dropped from the Yayasan Akalbudi trial. Attorney-General's Chamber appellate and trial division head Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar had been chosen to replace Raja Rozela as the lead prosecutor before the case was granted discharged not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) by the High Court in September. - NST, 8/12/2023
Within a month of appointment of Attorney General/Public Prosecutor, DUSUKI withdraws the appeal in another criminal case of accused Zahid Hamidi...
The attorney-general (A-G) has withdrawn all of the prosecution's appeals against Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's acquittal from 40 charges of corruption in connection with the Foreign Visa System (VLN) two years ago. - NST, 12/12/2024
And the former Attorney General/Public Prosecutor Ahmad Terrirudin was appointed a Federal Court Judge on 12/11/2024. Prior to his appointment as a federal judge, he served as the 12th Attorney General of Malaysia from 6 September 2023 to 11 November 2024.
SIMILARITY - the lead Prosecutor Raja Rozela removed then became Judge, the former AG/PP removed by reason of appointment to become Judge ... WONDER - Was Terriruddin removed because he 'did not want to withdraw the Appeal against Zahid Hamidi's acquittal?' or maybe, he did not want to help Zahid get an ACQUITTAL??? We do not know...we do not know...BUT what we know is that the PRIME MINISTER is powerful and can decide who becomes AG/PP and when an AG/PP can be removed because now there is no SECURITY of TENURE - and ...
Art. 145 Federal Constitution - Attorney General
(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister, appoint a person who is qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court to be the Attorney General for the Federation.
- this means the King appoints whoever the Prime Minister tells him to appoint
hold office during the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong - this means the AG/PP can be removed at ANY TIME ... and simply removed. Before, there was SECURITY of Tenure, and again there must be SECURITY of TENURE - where one is appointed, maybe until they reach the age of retirement like Judges, being 65 - and if the AG/PP is to be removed any earlier - it must be like before 'on the like grounds and in the like manner as a judge of the Federal Court'...(5) Subject to Clause (6), the Attorney General shall hold office during the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and may at any time resign his office and, unless he is a member of the Cabinet, shall receive such remuneration as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may determine.
(6) The person holding the office of Attorney General immediately prior to the coming into operation of this Article shall continue to hold the office on terms and conditions not less favourable than those applicable to him immediately before such coming into operation and shall not be removed from office except on the like grounds and in the like manner as a judge of the Federal Court.
See how Article 145 was before it was amended in 1963 - it was better, the PM did not CHOOSE the AG/PP, and there was security of tenure - until age of retirement, and VERY difficult to remove before that. WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THIS....no more PM picks, and REMOVES so easily as and when he wants....
NOTES
Art. 145
The present Article was substituted by Act 10/1960, section 26, in force from 16-09-1963. The earlier Article read as follows:
"145. (1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, after consultation with the Judicial and Legal Service Commission, appoint from among the members of the judicial and legal service an Attorney General, who shall be a person qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court.
(2) The Attorney General shall advise on legal matters referred to him by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet, and shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Muslim court, a native court or a court-martial.
(3) The Attorney General shall have the right of audience in, and shall take precedence over any other person appearing before, any court or tribunal.
(4) Subject to Clause (5), the Attorney General shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-five years or such later time, not later than six months after he attains that age, as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may approve.
(5) The Attorney General may at any time resign his office but shall not be removed from office except on the like grounds and in the like manner as a judge of the Federal Court.".
Clauses (1) & (6)
a. The words "Federal Court" substituted for the words "Supreme Court" by Act 26/1963, section 70, in force from 16-09-1963.
b. Subsection 18(2) of Act A566, in force from 01-01-1985, provides that a reference to the Federal Court shall now be construed as a reference to the Supreme Court.
c. The word "Federal" substituted for the word "Supreme" by Act A885, section 34, in force from 24-06-1994.
Clause (3)
a. The words "a native court" were inserted after the words "Muslim court" by Act 26/1963, section 70, in force from 16-09-1963.
b. The words "Syariah Court" substituted for the words "Muslim Court", by Act A354, section 45, in force from 27-08-1976.
Clause (3A) : Added by Act A704, section 10, in force from 10-06-1988.
Anwar seem to be 'forced' to make then 'court cluster' Zahid Hamidi into the Deputy Prime Minister --- and Minister. (Note, after Sheraton Move, the PN government (who also really depended on the BN support) decided to keep the court cluster(those facing cases) out of CABINET - so it continued even when UMNO's Ismail Sabri became the Prime Minister)
Is Anwar and the PH still SO threatened or FEARFUL that BN may pull out from the MADANI government and end Anwar Ibrahim's premiership?
As it is, let us look at the 'GOOD' things that have come Zahid Hamidi's way(the President of UMNO, BN Chair)
# He was ACQUITTED without even Defence being called by the HIGH COURT in the Foreign Visa System (VLN) case - and many people were unhappy with the judge's decision, and wanted that decision to be appealed to the Court of Appeal - which finally there was an APPEAL filed. If that appeal went on, we would have CONFIRMATION that the High Court judge did not make a mistake and was correct in his decision to ACQUIT, or the Court of Appeal would have decided the High Court Judge ERRED - and will sent the case back to the High Court for that criminal trial to continue...Then, The attorney-general (A-G) has withdrawn all of the prosecution's appeals against Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's acquittal from 40 charges of corruption in connection with the Foreign Visa System (VLN) two years ago. - NST, 12/12/2024
# Then, there was an ODD motion tabled allegedly during an UMNO General Meeting that ended with a Resolution that the TOP 2 position in UMNO not be contested in the coming party elections. It was ODD because normally, any Motion to be discussed at a General Meeting need to be tabled at least a week before the General Meeting - giving time for members to consider it. However, when this matter was brought to the attention of the Registrar of Society....suddenly the Home Minister steps in and gives an EXEMPTION (OK even if you did not follow the Party Constitution or the provisions of the Societies Act????) - this allow Zahid Hamidi to retain the PRESIDENCY of UMNO. There were indications that there will be contest for the top positions - as some in UMNO wanted to 'clean-up' UMNO and remove those from the Najib era...it was alleged. Retaining the PRESIDENCY meant that he had a say on who will stand as MP and ADUN candidates in the coming elections... Recent news report says that UMNO again has postponed its elections until after GE16 - meaning again Zahid has the influence to decide MPs, ADUNs and even Senators from UMNO...
# Then, the Akalbudi case. He gets a DNAA - now no more charges... No more criminal trial... Will Zahid now get an acquittal.. We shall see...
Attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali said he has studied the investigation papers and was satisfied that there are no grounds for action.
"Based on the facts and evidence as a whole, I, as the public prosecutor, am satisfied that no criminal offence has been committed by the prime minister in relation to the three investigation papers.
"I will return the relevant investigation papers to MACC today, with the instruction to close the three investigation papers," he told a press conference in Putrajaya this morning.
Apandi
was referring to the investigations concerning the RM2.6 billion
political donation and RM42 million from SRC International transferred
into Najib's personal bank accounts.
SRC is the former subsidiary of the prime minister's debt-laden brainchild 1MDB.
The transfers were first disclosed by the Wall Street Journal and whistleblower website Sarawak Report last July 3 based on leaked documents from Malaysian investigators.
Twenty-five days later, Apandi's predecessor Abdul Gani Patail was removed on health grounds, sparking off speculation it could be related to the investigations.
Following this, Najib dropped his deputy Muhyiddin Yassin and another minister Shafie Apdal from the cabinet.
The police also embarked on a hunt for those who leaked the investigation documents, prompting MACC to hold special prayers to seek divine protection.
Najib's detractors, such as former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, were not convinced that the RM2.6 billion, transferred in two batches ahead of the last general election in 2013, was a donation from a Middle Eastern source.
Meanwhile, Apandi revealed today Najib had returned RM2.03 billion to the Saudi royal family, two months after the May general election.
The prime minister, on the other hand, denied abusing public funds for personal gain and claimed that there is a conspiracy to topple him. - Malaysiakini,26/1/2016
Zahid applies for full acquittal in Yayasan Akalbudi case
Justice Nurulhuda Nuraini Nor will hear the application on Feb 24.
This follows the announcement by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) on Jan 8 that the case had been classified as requiring no further action (NFA) due to insufficient evidence to proceed with the trial.
Zahid, who was previously granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA), filed the application on Jan 28 along with a certificate of urgency.
Justice Nurulhuda Nuraini Nor was scheduled to hear the matter today, but deputy public prosecutor Badius Zaman Ahmad asked for an adjournment as the cause papers were only served on the AGC last Friday (Jan 30).
“We need to file an affidavit in reply,” he said, adding that the prosecution needed two weeks.
Nurulhuda then fixed Feb 24 to hear the matter.
Lawyers Hisyam Teh Poh Teik and Hamidi Noh appeared for Zahid.
On Sept 4, 2024, trial judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah granted Zahid a DNAA on 47 charges of corruption, money laundering and criminal breach of trust to allow further investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.
The judge previously ruled that the prosecution had established a prima facie case on all charges. Zahid and several other defence witnesses had given evidence when the AGC applied for the DNAA. FMT, 3/2/2026
Posts
