High Court to Hear Naimah Khalid’s Revision Application on March 12
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has fixed March 12 to hear a revision application by Naimah Khalid, who wants the court to exercise its power to review a lower court’s refusal to refer questions of law about a charge brought against her.
Complications in Fixing a Date
However, Raj & Sach, the solicitors representing the widow of former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, sent a letter to Justice K Muniandy’s secretary yesterday to fix a date for case management only after March 18, as their lawyers will be engaged elsewhere next week. The letter sighted by FMT stated that counsel Rajesh Nagarajan and Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal, from Naimah’s legal team, would be involved in a trial at the High Court in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, on March 12. They said the trial dates for that case could not be postponed.
Objection to Adjournment
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s legal and prosecution division director, Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, said they would object to an adjournment. "Our deputy public prosecutors have other cases to handle and most of them will be going on leave for Hari Raya Aidilfitri after March 18," Wan Shaharuddin, who is also a DPP, told FMT.
Background of the Case
Naimah, 67, claimed trial at the sessions court on January 23 last year to a charge of failing to comply with the terms of an asset declaration notice under the MACC Act 2009. She was accused of failing to declare her ownership of companies, several plots of land here and in Penang, as well as two vehicles.
Revision Application
Naimah filed the revision application, brought under Section 323 of the Criminal Procedure Code, read with Section 35 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, on March 5. The following day, the court informed the parties of the hearing date.
Power of the High Court
Under Section 323 of the CPC, a High Court judge may call for and examine the records of any proceedings in a subordinate criminal court to satisfy himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence, or order recorded.
Sessions Court’s Ruling
The sessions court had on February 18 dismissed Naimah’s application as being without merit. Judge Azura Alwi ruled that the case did not involve any constitutional issues. Naimah had last year applied to refer questions of law relating to sections 30(5), 36(2) and 62 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009, and Section 32 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Amla).
Constitutional Issues
The court agreed with the prosecution that no referral was necessary as she was not being prosecuted under Section 32 of Amla. The judge said the application was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process. Azura also said sections 30 and 36 of the MACC Act were investigative provisions, with parliamentary records showing they were drafted to aid in corruption investigations.
Conclusion
The High Court’s decision on March 12 is expected to be a significant development in this case, which has been ongoing for several months. The court’s ruling will likely have implications for Naimah’s legal team and the prosecution, as well as the wider public.
FAQs
Q: What is the purpose of Naimah’s revision application?
A: Naimah’s revision application is aimed at challenging the sessions court’s refusal to refer questions of law about a charge brought against her.
Q: What is the significance of the March 12 hearing date?
A: The March 12 hearing date is significant as it will determine the fate of Naimah’s revision application and potentially have implications for the case as a whole.
Q: What is the role of the High Court in this case?
A: The High Court has the power to review the sessions court’s decision and exercise its discretion to refer questions of law to a higher court.