How can evidence be insufficient? Civil group question Zahid’s NFA status

Iklan
The latest NFA classification now precludes any possibility of future legal action on these specific charges. - Bernama file photo

Yesterday, the AGC announced that the 47 charges against Zahid; comprising criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering linked to Yayasan Akalbudi, would not proceed.

SHAH ALAM – Two prominent civil advocacy groups have expressed strong disapproval of the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ (AGC) decision to classify the corruption case involving Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Yayasan Akalbudi as ‘No Further Action’ (NFA).

In a joint statement, the United Movement for National Accountability (Umany) and Himpunan Advokasi Rakyat Malaysia (Haram) described the move as a significant step backwards in Malaysia’s anti-corruption efforts.

Iklan
Iklan

“Umany and Haram strongly condemn the decision to mark the case as NFA and reject the AGC’s claim that the evidence is insufficient.

"This contradicts the High Court’s earlier ruling that a prima facie case had been established against Zahid.

Iklan

“We urge the Attorney-General’s Chambers to resume the prosecution that was previously discontinued,” the statement read.

Yesterday, the AGC announced that the 47 charges against Zahid; comprising criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering linked to Yayasan Akalbudi, would not proceed.

Iklan

The chambers stated that the available evidence was not robust enough to secure a conviction, effectively closing the matter.

The decision has drawn heavy criticism due to the conflicting stances between the judiciary and the AGC.

Iklan

In January 2022, the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled that there was sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case, requiring Ahmad Zahid to enter his defence.

Despite this, the prosecution subsequently applied for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA), which was granted on Sept 4, 2023.

The latest NFA classification now precludes any possibility of future legal action on these specific charges.

“This raises serious questions about whether the Madani Government is truly committed to fighting corruption, or if political compromises are being made to protect allies,” the groups stated.

They also highlighted the broader implications of the decision, citing other high-profile corruption scandals in public universities and mining licence controversies in Sabah.

They warned that allowing a political leader, previously found to have a case to answer, to go unpunished could erode public trust in the legal system and foster a culture of impunity.

“Before coming to power, the Madani Government promised a clean administration. Yet, decisions such as this suggest that the fight against corruption is treated more as a slogan than a priority.

“The public does not need hollow promises; we require genuine commitment and consistent enforcement of the law,” the statement added.

Umany and Haram urged Malaysians to remain vigilant, closely monitor high-profile corruption cases, and pressure the government to fulfil its promises of genuine institutional reform.