[ad_1]
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court accepted a request from Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi (Photo), who faces charges of corruption, abuse of power and money laundering, to remove statements that are stubborn and conclusive in written testimony.
The statements involved were from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigating officer, Fairul Rafiq Hamiruddin, who is one of the prosecution witnesses.
Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah made the decision after finding that paragraphs 26, 27, 29, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37 in Fairul Rafiq’s witness statement were prejudicial against Ahmad Zahid.
The court also agreed that any form of opinion and conclusion from the investigating officer’s statements should be eliminated in their entirety.
“This decision also applies to all witness statements from other investigating officers,” he said after hearing presentations from both parties on Tuesday (October 13).
Earlier, lawyer Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, on behalf of Ahmad Zahid, stated that the written testimony of the MACC investigating officer directly stated that his client had accepted or committed corruption, when it is the court that must determine whether a crime has been committed. .
In paragraph 37, Fairul Rafiq’s testimony stated that ‘Therefore, I hereby state that the accused, as Minister of the Interior who approved the appointment of Profound Radiance as Operator of CSO Nepal and Pakistan, has received bribes from Azlan Shah ‘.
“So this evidence should be removed from the witness statement.
“Even Azlan Shah Jafril (38th prosecution witness) in his testimony stated that there was no element of corruption in his gift, as ‘charity’ was clearly written on his check.
“This evidence is categorized as ‘opinion’ because there is no evidence in this court of this gift as corruption. Such evidence is inadmissible, “he added.
Deputy Prosecutor Gan Peng Kun, in his presentation, said that Fairul Rafiq’s witness statement had no opinions but was based on investigations and evidence.
“The investigating officer has the right to present evidence and it is up to the court to decide the reliability of the investigation,” he said.
DPP Datuk Raja Rozela Raja Toran said that the evidence presented by the investigating officer could not be taken as an opinion because it was based on evidence gathered during the investigation.
“He is trying to connect the dots. He informs the court about the evidence he found and it is up to the court to evaluate it. But this does not make (the statement) inadmissible,” he added.
Ahmad Zahid, 67, faces 47 charges, 12 of them for criminal breach of trust, eight for corruption and 27 for money laundering involving tens of millions of ringgit in funds belonging to Yayasan Akalbudi. – Bernama
[ad_2]
