"NAMPAKNYA kita kena jadi peguam sebelum boleh faham selok belok satu kes jenayah" (I suppose we have to be a lawyer to be able to understand the twists and turns of a criminal case).
Those were the words of my neighbour, a government retiree, as we walked out of our surau after Subuh prayer last Saturday. When I asked him why he said that, he replied that he had been listening to a report of the case against Datuk Seri Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim, the night before, and is now utterly confused.
He asked, "Does this mean strike one for Aziz?" I asked my neighbour what had he heard of the case so far. I listened to his reply, after which we talked for another ten minutes, before I left.
Much later, as I was having my first coffee of the day, I realised that perhaps my neighbour was right. I never had any problems following the case and it did not cross my mind that other people might not be so lucky.
The accused, who is a member of Parliament for Baling, Kedah and former Chairman of Tabung Haji, was charged with corruption as well as money-laundering.
For the former, he was charged under section 16(a)(A) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009. For the latter, he was charged under section 4(1)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering Act, Anti-Terrorism Financing Act and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001. If convicted, both offences carry heavy penalties which would signal the end of the accused's political career.
His elder brother Datuk Abdul Latif Rahim was charged as a co-accused but was later given a DNAA when the prosecution decided to drop all charges against him. He is expected to become a witness for the prosecution.
On December 23, 2020, Azeez applied to strike out all the charges against him at the High Court, contending that they are defective and groundless. He also claimed that the prosecution against him was mala fide.
On February 23, 2021, counsel Amer Hamzah Arshad (representing Azeez) made his submissions in court as to why the charges against his client should be struck out. He said that his client was initially arrested for investigations into the embezzlement of Tabung Haji funds, but later in the charges prererred against him, there was no mention of Tabung Haji at all.
Amer also said that during the entire period when Azeez was arrested and released on police bail, the MACC had come up with a narrative that the investigation was related to Tabung Haji and this could be seen from the media reports. Counsel also said the charges were defective as they lack particularisation. There were no specific dates and locations stated in the charges.
In her reply, deputy public prosecutor Aslinda Ahad said Azeez's application was premature and was an abuse of the court process. After hearing submissions from both sides, Judge Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin said that he would deliver his decision on March 12.
Last Friday (March 12, 2021), in dismissing the application, the Judge said: "I find the reason given by the applicant baseless. The applicant also failed to show that the charges made against him were mala fide. In my opinion, this case is not a suitable and appropriate case for the court to exercise its existing power to set aside and quash the charges against the applicant. Therefore, the applicant's application is dismissed."
The Judge said that the charges under the MACC Act were not flawed even though four separate projects were combined in one charge as the bribes received were in relation to those projects. With regard to the money laundering offences, the Judge said there was no ambiguity as the charge contained details as required by sections 152 and 153 of the CPC.
On the issue of the applicant being investigated over Tabung Haji, but the charge was not related to the board, the Judge said it was up to the public prosecutor to initiate prosecution under a law they deemed appropriate.
I asked Rahman, a young criminal lawyer, for his views. He said the quash application was a calculated strategy, as a first chess-move to test the wind. Losing it (as had happened last Friday) will not negatively impact the trial, but winning it will become "a good boost" for him.
But, like any judicial combat, winning and losing is never certain and there is always the inevitable appeal process.
The writer, a former federal counsel at the Attorney-General's Chambers, is deputy chairman of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War
