KUALA LUMPUR (April 19): Former prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who is Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) president, has filed a motion to strike out the four counts of abuse of power he was charged with.
In seeking for the charges to be struck out, the Pagoh Member of Parliament, who had previously claimed that the charges are a form of political persecution, had also sought an acquittal and discharge of the predicate offence of abuse of power.
The motion dated April 18, sighted by The Edge and filed at the High Court through Messrs Chethan Jethwani, also sought a stay of the criminal proceedings at the Sessions Court until the application is heard.
Muhyiddin, who would be 76 years old in May, was charged at the KL Sessions Court with four counts of abuse of power under Section 23 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009.
The charges alleged that as the PM and Bersatu president, he had received RM232.5 million in bribes from corporate entities and an individual between March 1, 2020 and Aug 20, 2021.
The charges alleged that the money was deposited into Bersatu’s bank accounts in bribes from Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, Nepturis Sdn Bhd, Mamfor Sdn Bhd and Datuk Azman Yusoff.
It is understood that the defence is seeking to strike out the abuse of power charges, and if this is successful, Muhyiddin's money laundering charges would also fall as abuse of power is the predicate offence.
For two of the money laundering charges, Muhyiddin was charged with receiving proceeds from illegal activities amounting to RM195 million out of the RM232.5 million from Bukhary Equity.
Muhyiddin, who is also Perikatan Nasional chairman, has maintained his innocence, that he never received any of these payments personally or into his bank account.
At the Shah Alam Sessions Court on March 13, he also claimed trial for money laundering of RM5 million from Bukhary Equity.
Bukhary Equity is a company 99% owned by tycoon Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al Bukhary, while the remaining 1% is held by his wife Syarifah Zarah Syed Kechik.
Nepturis is equally owned by Aliza Abdul Malek and Mohd Rizman Akum Khan.
Mamfor is 60% owned by Shaharani Kassim, 39% by Shahradzi Shamsuddin, and 1% held by Faezah Kassim while Azman is the Malaysian Bumiputra Contractor Association president.
Charges are abuse of process, defective and bad in law
In Muhyiddin’s affidavit in support of the application to strike out the charges, he claimed the abuse of power charges he faces had disclosed no offence and hence are defective and bad in law under Section 152 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
He contended that Bersatu is a society registered under Section 7(1) of the Societies Act 1966 and that MACC had confused the definition of organisation and equated it to a society, which are two distinct definitions.
Muhyiddin further alleged that neither one of the four abuse of power charges disclosed an offence under Section 23(1) of the MACC Act as Bersatu being a society cannot be construed as an associate, as the word “associate” is defined by Section 3 of the MACC Act to mean, among others, “any organisation of which such person, or any nominee of his, is a partner, or a person in charge or in control of, or has a controlling interest in, its business or affairs”.
Parliament, he added, could not have possibly intended the word organisation contained in the MACC Act to also include a society as Section 71(1) of the MACC Act expressly provides that the minister may, from time to time, prescribe any society, union, organisation or body to be a public body, and public body includes any society, union, organisation or body the minister may prescribe by order.
He added that in the event that Parliament had intended the word “organisation” contained in MACC Act to also include a society, it is unnecessary for Parliament to also insert the word “society” into Sections 3(l) and 71(1) of the MACC Act. If the word organisation in the Act is interpreted to also include society, such interpretation certainly run afoul to the established Parliament doctrine, he claimed.
Muhyiddin’s affidavit also claimed that the charges are an abuse of process and in breach of Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as it allegedly lacked particulars as to how he had abused his position or the PM’s office for the purpose of gratification.
Furthermore, all four abuse of power charges lack particulars, thereby violating Muhyiddin’s constitutional rights as enshrined under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution regarding liberty of a person.
This is because the prosecution had failed to particularise how he had allegedly committed these abuses of power, he claimed, so he would be unable to give meaningful instructions to his lawyers to prepare his defence or representation to the prosecutor.
“Thus, my fundamental right to a fair trial as enshrined under Article 5 of the constitution has been violated,” he said, adding the prosecution’s failure to fulfil its statutory duty had gravely affected his quality of life as he had to borrow money to pay for his bail and to constantly be worried and stress over the unclear charges that could result in him being imprisoned.
Hence, he claimed the abuse of power charges is an abuse of the court process.