Zahid takes Malaysian Bar’s DNAA challenge to Federal Court

KUALA LUMPUR May 26 — Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has applied for the Federal Court to set aside a Court of Appeal ruling that granted the Malaysian Bar leave to challenge the Attorney General’s (AG) decision to seek a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) for the Umno president in his Yayasan Akalbudi corruption case.

Zahid, as the second respondent to the Bar’s application, filed five legal questions to meet the required threshold under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, Free Malaysia Today reported.

Leave to appeal to the Federal Court is granted only if the case raises novel constitutional or legal questions of public importance being heard for the first time.

Lawyer Shahrul Fazli Kamarulzaman confirmed that the cause papers were filed at the Federal Court registry yesterday. The first respondent, the AG, is expected to file a separate leave application next week.

Zahid and the AG are seeking to reinstate the June 27, 2024, High Court ruling that initially dismissed the Bar’s leave application.

On May 7 this year, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Bar had crossed the threshold required for the merits of its case to be heard in the High Court.

Justice Faizah Jamaludin, who sat with Justices Lim Hock Leng and Nadzrin Wok Nordin, unanimously held that the Bar had an arguable case that was not frivolous.

She added that Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah’s granting of the DNAA following the prosecution’s application in 2023 was only a procedural order made in the course of the criminal proceedings.

In January 2022, Sequerah (now a Court of Appeal judge) ordered Zahid to enter his defence on all 47 corruption, criminal breach of trust, and money laundering charges after determining that the prosecution had made out a prima facie case against the Barisan Nasional chairman.

Nearly two years later, in September 2023, Zahid was granted a DNAA on all 47 charges pending further investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

Notably, the case was classified as requiring “no further action” (NFA) by the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) in January this year.