The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has dismissed claims its reputation and credibility have been tarnished by the discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) granted in Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption case.
Attorney-General Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh, in a statement yesterday, said charges against an accused may be dropped at any moment as long as judgment has not been passed.
Terrirudin was responding to Bar Council president Karen Cheah, who today claimed that the AG-C’s decision to apply for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal at “such a late juncture” had tarnished its reputation and credibility.
According to the Attorney General, former AG Tan Sri Idrus Harun had exercised his prerogative under the Federal Constitution to halt proceedings against Ahmad Zahid.
“The AGC never used the word ‘withdraw’ in the case involving Ahmad Zahid, as mentioned in the Malaysian Bar’s statement.
“The statement (by the Malaysian Bar) referred to Article 145(3) of the Constitution that clearly gives full prerogative to the AG to, among others, halt proceedings of any charges,” the AG said in a statement on Friday (Sept 8).
On Sept 7, Malaysian Bar president Karen Cheah criticised the DNAA granted to Ahmad Zahid, saying the AGC’s explanation on the matter was “devoid of proper justifications”.
Cheah also claimed that it “rings hollow for the AGC to wholly attribute the withdrawal of the case to the High Court and use that reason in a media statement, instead of providing a detailed explanation”.
Terrirudin said that Section 254(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that the prosecutor, in any stage of the trial, may inform the courts that charges will not proceed.
“The AG can stop charges at any stage while the judgement hasn’t been meted out and this includes the stage after prima facie being proven.
“It is also important to note that this isn’t the first time where charges were halted after a prima facie case was proven,” he said.
Terrirudin also said the AGC is in the “best position” to decide on whether charges should continue as it will be based on a variety of factors, such as investigative reports and representations, among others.
Meanwhile, he said it was the job of an AG to consider every argument given by the accused and it will not rush into rejecting representations by anyone.
“The AGC’s duty isn’t to ensure that any of the accused are convicted at all costs.
“Instead, it is the AGC’s duty to ensure that the law is upheld based on Blackstone’s Ratio where ‘it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer’,” he said.
Terrirudin said the AGC requires time to scrutinise new documents and representations before making any new decision.
“The AGC hopes that everyone will stop speculating and spreading, as the department and investigative parties are still investigating new evidence on this case.
“The AGC will decide after detailed and comprehensive investigations are completed,” said Terrirudin.
There has been a slew of criticisms against Zahid’s conditional acquittal from graft charges.