PUTRAJAYA: The Malaysian Bar has filed an appeal to reinstate a legal bid to challenge Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) in the Yayasan Akal Budi corruption case.
The deputy prime minister's lawyer Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik confirmed that he received the copy of the Bar's notice of appeal yesterday.
According to the notice filed by Abhilaash Subramaniam & Co., the Bar was not satisfied with the entire decision of Judge Datuk Amarjeet Singh on June 27.
Amarjeet, when dismissing the leave (permission) to initiate the judicial review said the Bar failed to meet the provisions required under Section 96 of the Court of Judicature Act to be allowed to initiate the proceedings.
The court also ruled that the applicant (the Bar) failed to present clear evidence to rebut the legal presumption that the decision and actions of the Attorney-General (AG) to discontinue the criminal proceedings against the deputy prime minister were lawful.
"The AG is not obligated to provide the information, documentation, reasons, basis, and details that were relied upon to reach the decision to apply for a DNAA against Zahid, as demanded by the applicant," he said.
The court also dismissed the Bar's application to refer three constitutional questions regarding its challenge on Zahid's DNAA to the Federal Court for determination.
The Bar Council, in an application filed on Dec 2, last year, had named the AG and Zahid as respondents in their application for the DNAA decision to be rescinded.
The Bar, as the sole applicant, had applied for a mandamus order from the court to instruct the AG to act in accordance with the law and if applicable, act under Section 254A of the Criminal Procedure Code to prosecute Zahid again.
It had also sought an order for the AG to provide the Bar with information on the status of further investigations into Zahid's case, including any move to file new charges, proceed with the trial, or cancel investigations.
On Sept 4, last year, Zahid who is also the Bagan Datuk member of parliament, was freed of all 47 graft charges he faced after the prosecution applied for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal against him.
However, Court of Appeal judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah, who presided as the High Court judge, refused to grant full acquittal against Zahid by stating that the AG had the authority to initiate and withdraw charges at any time before a judgement is rendered.
Sequerah also noted that judicial time and a great amount of taxpayers' money would have been wasted if the prosecution decided not to proceed with the case.