KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court today dismissed the prosecution’s application for a stay of proceedings to refer questions of law in connection with the charges faced by Toh Puan Na’imah Abdul Khalid for failing to declare her assets.
Judge K Muniandy issued the ruling after deputy public prosecutor Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin informed the court that the prosecution and defence team had reached a mutual agreement on the matter.
The defence team representing the widow of former Finance Minister the late Tun Daim Zainuddin is led by counsel Datuk Dr Gurdial Singh Nijar.
Wan Shaharuddin stated they had reached an agreement that the application to refer the questions of law under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 would be heard in this court.
He added they also agreed to withdraw both the application to stay the proceedings and the application to transfer it to another court.
Gurdial confirmed the agreement between both parties.
The hearing was scheduled to take place today before Muniandy but the judge said he would be transferred to the Court of Appeal in the near future.
Wan Shaharuddin also informed the court that the prosecution had provided an undertaking to withdraw its appeal against an earlier High Court decision granting Na’imah’s application to refer questions of law to the Federal Court.
Judge Muniandy subsequently set November 10 for case management.
On August 21 Muniandy had allowed Na’imah’s application ruling that the questions of law raised were neither frivolous nor an abuse of the court process.
Na’imah was initially charged at the Sessions Court on January 23 2024 for failing to comply with a notice to declare her assets which reportedly include Menara Ilham and several other properties in Kuala Lumpur and Penang.
She was charged under Section 36(2) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 which carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment a fine of 100,000 ringgit or both upon conviction.
On February 29 2024 Na’imah filed an application to refer questions of law concerning the interpretation of several statutory provisions to a higher court.
These pertained to Sections 30(5) 36(2) and 62 of the MACC Act 2009 as well as Section 32(3)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001.
However on February 18 Sessions Court Judge Azura Alwi dismissed this application ruling that it was without merit as it did not raise any constitutional issues. – Bernama