Most strange - WHY did Attorney General/Public Prosecutor Dusuki(3rd AG/PP under PM Anwar Ibrahim) issue a 'No Further Action (NFA)' with regard to Zahid Hamidi who no longer is facing any criminal charge or trial in court.
The Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) has decided that no further action (NFA) will be taken on the 47 charges of criminal breach of trust, corruption, and money laundering related to Yayasan Akalbudi funds involving Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
According to a statement by the AGC on Thursday (Jan 8), this decision results in the final termination of the case, in accordance with the powers and discretion of the Attorney General under the Federal Constitution and relevant laws.
"The department emphasises that the decision was made based on professional and legal considerations, taking into account the interests of justice, the integrity of the prosecution process, and the need to ensure certainty and transparency in the criminal justice system," the statement said. -Star, 8/1/2025
WHY the Announcement? ZAHID has already been DISCHARGED - which means that there is no more Charge or Criminal Trial anymore. So, I do not believe that a NFA announcement can lead to any application for ACQUITTAL as there is no more case at the moment... DISCHARGE was the end of the case...in my opinion.
Thus, Zahid is like everyone else now - he is no longer facing any criminal charges or trial. So, there is no need to even issue any statement saying that there is NFA. A NFA is usually issued when a person is being investigated and may be charged for an offence.... So, the NFA was unnecessary and not required at all.
In the past, there was another AG/PP, Apandi Ali who also decided to also close investigations - the Malaysian Bar Resolution is a good read to understand the issues then with the 1MDB cases.. where the Malaysian Bar calls for the Solicitor General, pursuant to section 376(2) Criminal Procedure Code, to assume the role and responsibilities of Public Prosecutor in the cases involving Najib Tun Razak, 1MDB, SRC International and the RM2.6 billion, considering the disability of the Attorney General to continue to act as Public Prosecutor for these cases, by reason of past conduct and the existing competing and conflicting roles of the Attorney General.
Malaysian Bar calls on Mohamed Apandi Ali to immediately resign as Attorney General, for the good of Malaysia..
So, is our current AG/PP Mohd DUSUKI a good Public Prosecutor? Remember, it was Idrus Harun days before his term ended that 'gifted' a DNAA - and since the decision is personal to the AG/PP then - we could not get him to answer WHY he decided to do that... Then, AG/PP Terriruddin was the one who filed the APPEAL against the High Court's acquittal of Zahid (best that the Court of Appeal confirms the correctness of that High Court Judge's decision) - and then came Dusuki - who withdraw that appeal, and now issues a NFA statement when there is NO more case as Zahid already DISCHARGED long time ago.
So, WHY now - was it a reaction to the talk suggesting that UMNO/BN withdraw from the PM Anwar's Madani government? Was it to appease Zahid and UMNO/BN to stay on in the Pakatan Harapan-led Coalition Government? After all, there was talk of BN leaving Anwar's Madani's government where Zahid just confimed that BN will remain part of MADANI government [2 days later, the NFA announcement - related or simply coincidence?]
Umno will remain part of the unity government until the next general election, party president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said today, dismissing renewed calls from within the party for it to withdraw support and shift to the Opposition.- Malay Mail, 6/1/2025
Was it to give Zahid a 'GIFT" in the form of a 'justification' to try to apply to court for an ACQUITAL? Speculation...until today it happened...
Umno president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi will apply for a full acquittal in his Yayasan Akalbudi case, following the Attorney General Chamber's decision to terminate its prosecution.
The AGC on Thursday classified the case as "no further action" after concluding that there was insufficient evidence to proceed.
In response, lead defence counsel Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik said an application will be filed for a discharge amounting to an acquittal (DAA). “We will make an application to court for a full acquittal,” Hisyam told The Edge when contacted. - Edge, 8/1/2025
Since September 2023, there has been NO MORE criminal charge or case in this case of Zahid Hamidi, as he was already DISCHARGED..
...the Attorney General (“AG”)’s decision of 4 September 2023 in applying to the Court for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (“DNAA”) in the case involving 47 charges against Deputy Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi (“Zahid Hamidi”).
Having considered at length the facts and circumstances of Zahid Hamidi’s case, the Malaysian Bar has taken this legal recourse as part of its statutory duty to uphold the cause of justice, uninfluenced by fear or favour. It cannot be disputed that Zahid Hamidi’s trial commenced more than four years ago on 18 November 2019, where a prima facie case was established — with 77 days of trial having been conducted, Zahid Hamidi’s 15th witness giving evidence, and the matter being in the midst of its defence stage on 4 September 2023 — when assertions were made by the AG that further investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission was needed based on several representations made by Zahid Hamidi as at December 2022, three years after the case had commenced. 1, - Malaysian Bar Website
That DNAA was questioned by many - if Zahid was so confident, then he should have just continued with the TRIAL - call all needed Witnesses, adduced whatever evidence, which he could do as the accused. At the end of the trial, the JUDGE should have been the one to decide whether Zahid was GUILTY or not - that would have been the PROPER and right way. BUT, suddenly, the AG/PP using his Constitutional powers decided to stop the trial - and the effect was that Zahid Hamidi was DISCHARGED - meaning thereafter no more charges, no more criminal trial...
One BIG hurdle for Prosecution in any criminal case is proving to the court a PRIMA FACIE CASE, which they successfully did in Zahid's case > after that it is said that it is very difficult for any accused NOT TO BE CONVICTED - because the accused must now raise REASONABLE DOUBT for each and every charge to avoid being CONVICTED. Be reminded that even in the prosecution case, the accused lawyers are FREE to challenge the prosecution's evidence and even the credibility of witnesses by cross-examinations > thus when the prosecution still is able to prove PRIMA FACIE case, it is a BIG deal... Would Zahid Hamidi be able to avoid CONVICTION and sentencing if the case proceeded to the end? POSSIBLE yes...but very difficult > but that RISK of conviction was avoided when suddenly the then Attorney General/Public Prosecutor( ) decided to stop the case, and allowing Zahid to be discharged -- NO MORE CHARGES...NO MORE CRIMINAL TRIAL...
The LAST 'GIFT" of the outgoing AG/PP Idrus Harun(who was AG until 6/9/2023, and then Ahmad Terrirudin was AG/PP from 6/9/2023 until 11/11/2024, when Mohd DUSUKI became AG/PP on 11/11/2024...].
Idrus Harun avoided questions - as he was no more AG/PP on 6/9/2023 > Remember, this power to discontinue criminal trials is personal to the AG/PP and not the AGC ...
Within a month of appointment, 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
The decision to acquit by that High Court judge was 'controversial' - so much so, there was public sentiments asking the Public Prosecutor to appeal - and finally, the appeal was filed - but the hearing of the appeal was delayed, and finally DUSUKI withdrew the appeal. [Would the Court of Appeal overturn the acquittal of Zahid, or will the Court of Appeal affirm the acquittal - confirming that the High Court Judge made no mistakes? We will not know - as again the Court of Appeal hearing and deciding on the appeal was removed>>>>]
It is interesting to consider how the BN/UMNO and its President Zahid Hamidi, seem to have GAINED so much - despite being continued to be rejected by the Malaysian people in the last General Elections(which saw their number of MPs being reduced to just 30)
Anwar Ibrahim could not be Prime Minister, and Pakatan Harapan could not form government. Worse, the Opposition PN was most clear that they WILL NOT form a coalition government with Anwar/PH - and the Sabah and Sarawak MPs were not committed either way. That left BN/UMNO with their 30MPs - which if they came together with PH, it was enough to form government by a THIN majority...
And BN/UMNO was 'VICTORIOUS' - they who were discarded by the people, as evident from the election results, lived on with SIGNIFICANT power in Anwar's Madani government...
Is there a possibility that Zahid may be charged again in the future? Yes, there is and it is the same as everyone?
Maybe, the next AG/PP after Dusuki may have a different view....We recall how AG/PP Apandi Ali opinion that Najib had committed no crime had been PROVEN WRONG thanks to a new AG/PP Tommy Thomas who BRAVELY charged Najib(former Prime Minister), and also Zahid Hamidi(former Deputy Prime Minister)...
After the 1MDB conviction of Najib, and noting that the then AG/PP Apandi Ali has been proven so wrong in his then declared opinion that Najib did not commit any crimes with regard the 1MDB case.
This shows that there are Attorney General/Public Prosecutor who have different opinions. When Tommy Thomas became AG/PP, he had a different view and Najib was charged and tried - and now convicted and sentenced...
This also raises the question of the independence of the AG/PP... Can a AG/PP be influenced, or even directed to act by the Prime Minister and/or the Executive or others? This was also a concern raised in a Malaysian Bar Resolution in 2016...
The Public Prosecutor MUST be Independent - and no Prime Minister or Executive arm of government must be able to compromise this independence. We need some other to chose our Public Prosecutor > no more the Prime Minister's choice.
We need 'Security of Tenure' - once appointed, they cannot be removed easily as and when the PM feels so - so, appointment should be until RETIREMENT AGE.
There is concern now, that PM Anwar (or Prime Ministers of past) may have too much influence over Public Prosecutors...and this must END.
Good that Government already agreed to separate the Attorney General and the Public Prosecutor, and this RIGHT - but I worry that PM Anwar's government may delay this separation ... ???
Ever decision of Ministers or Prime Minister can be taken to court for JUDICIAL REVIEW - it is absurd to say that decisions of the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor cannot be subject to JUDICIAL REVIEW... I believe that the Malaysian Bar's application is pending before the Court of Appeal now...
See also
Zahid Hamidi - Court of Appeal not respected? No more adjournments - Let COA hear the appeal. CLEAN and idependent administration of justice is fundamental.
Questionable appointment of Dusuki b4 previous AG reaches retirement age? Dusuki and link to Zahid's case? We need an Independent Public Prosecutor..
Judicial Review Filed by the Malaysian Bar over the Attorney General’s Decision in Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi's case?
Was PM's comments about Zahid Hamidi's case inappropriate? A personal opinion OK - but as PM?
29 Bribery Charges - mid-trial discontinuance and acquittal - Time to Abolish ACQUITAL safe for after trial/close of prosecution case?
Zahid Hamidi's can always be charged again, the trial reinstated and continued - section 254A CPC? Explaining and concerns?
COMMENT | We, the undersigned organisations, demand accountability from the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) over its decision of no further action (NFA) over Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s family charitable foundation, Yayasan Akalbudi (YAB).
Zahid faced a total of 47 charges - 27 for money laundering, 12 for criminal breach of trust (CBT) and eight for corruption.
The case is extraordinary because the AGC withdrew all 47 charges on Sept 4, 2023, after the establishment of a prima facie case and four years of trial, allowing Zahid to secure a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA).
This NFA appears to be a deliberate move to allow the deputy prime minister to apply for a discharge amounting to acquittal" (DAA).
How could a prima facie be established, yet the entire case collapses later to not even warrant investigation? Between the High Court and the AGC, the credibility of at least one party is now in question.
Dusuki the common thread
Attorney-General Dusuki Mokhtar personally has to account for the AGC decision on its legal basis, public interest considerations, representations received, and the internal review process that led to the NFA outcome.
For the record, the 2023 withdrawal was applied by Dusuki then as deputy public prosecutor.
Then, a month after his appointment as the AG, the AGC withdrew its appeal against the High Court’s acquittal (DAA) of Zahid in his Foreign Visa System (VLN) case, where he faced 40 charges for awarding contracts in bringing in foreign labourers in his capacity as the then home minister.
The correlation of Dusuki’s involvement and Zahid’s discharges raises a legitimate question of the AG’s integrity until the AGC provides the rigorous justification we demand.
The timing of this NFA before the separation of AG and public prosecutor (PP) roles also invites speculation whether Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s most important institutional reform is compromised by impunity to his most important ally.
While Article 145(3) guarantees the AG’s discretion to conduct or discontinue criminal charges, the public trust in the prosecution may be undermined by abuse with questionable decisions without detailed grounds for the public to scrutinise.
If this is not addressed, the public’s disappointment with the prosecution may continue after the AG-PP separation.
Therefore, we call for clear prosecutorial guidelines on discontinuing cases, especially those involving elected representatives and other powerful individuals; the requirement for a reasoned explanation when charges are withdrawn or not pressed in high-profile cases of corruption, power abuse, CBT, and money laundering; and independent oversight of major prosecutorial decisions.
AGC must explain
Public accountability must take precedence over confidentiality. The AGC’s statement announcing the NFA and its 2023 withdrawal provided no reasoning whatsoever for this decision.
The public has been given no information about:
What factors led to both decisions after the establishment of a prima facie case in 2022?
Whether new evidence emerged, and if so, what had changed?
What assessments were made in the public interest in prosecuting, withdrawing, and now discontinuing the investigation into the 47 serious charges?
Who within the AGC reviewed and approved both decisions?
What representations were made, and on what basis were they considered?
Both questionable decisions involving Zahid are sending a harmful message of a two-tier (dua darjat) justice system where powerful individuals enjoy impunity, eroding public trust in the criminal justice system and law enforcement.
Both decisions are part of a troubling pattern in how corruption cases involving high-ranking elected representatives are handled in Malaysia - a pattern documented extensively in a Projek Sama research study titled “Do Politicians Still Get Away with Corruption after GE15?” (2025).
The home minister’s response that this falls “fully under the authority of the AGC” under Article 145 of the Federal Constitution does not address the fundamental issue: constitutional authority does not negate the responsibility for transparency and accountability in its exercise.
The power of prosecutorial discretion is not absolute - it must be exercised in good faith, free from improper considerations, and with regard to the public interest.
Corruption by public officials, more so with elected representatives, strikes at the heart of democratic governance. It encourages conspiracy theories and populism amidst democratic deficits.
The fight against corruption begins with holding the powerful accountable. Transparency is not optional - it is essential.
This statement was jointly issued by PROJEK SAMA, BERSIH, and RASUAH BUSTERS. - Malaysiakini, 9/1/2026
Questions remain over NFA decision in Zahid's case, says Ramkarpal
PETALING JAYA: The decision by the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) not to take further action in the Yayasan Akalbudi case involving Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi raises questions over the investigation of the matter, says DAP legal bureau chairman Ramkarpal Singh.
He said the AGC's statement on the decision mentioned a comprehensive review of materials, but did not say if it had reviewed the prima facie findings of the Kuala Lumpur High Court in 2022.
ALSO READ: AGC decides NFA on Zahid's 47 charges linked to Yayasan Akalbudi
"With respect, it must be stressed that this is not a case in which no findings were made"It is common knowledge that the High Court had found a prima facie case against Ahmad Zahid at the end of the prosecution’s case in 2022 after the trial had commenced some four years earlier in 2019, with many witnesses giving evidence on behalf of the prosecution," the Bukit Gelugor MP said in a statement on Thursday (Jan 8).
"As such, there can be no doubt that such findings were based on evidence which Ahmad Zahid was, in law, obliged to rebut until the prosecution applied for an order of discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) for all the said 47 charges on Sept 4, 2023," he added.
The AGC had on Thursday decided that no further action would be taken on the 47 charges of criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering related to Yayasan Akalbudi funds involving the Deputy Prime Minister.
ALSO READ: NFA in Zahid's case AG's call, says Home Minister
Ramkarpal said the AGC's decision does not inspire confidence, and it must explain why, in its view, the prima facie findings carry no weight.
"The AGC’s statement clearly lacks substance and amounts to a mere general statement that it is now satisfied that the matter ought not to be proceeded with.
"With respect, a failure by the AGC to provide a satisfactory explanation will likely further erode confidence in it, which is ill-advised," he added. - Star, 9/1/2026
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment