Did the Court of Appeal find evidence the RM120,000 belonged to ABBE?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Court of Appeal Found No Evidence That the RM120,000 Belonged to ABBE

The Court of Appeal determined that the RM120,000 in question did not belong to Armada Bumi Bersatu Enterprise (ABBE). Instead, the appellate court found that the funds were intended to finance the accused's election campaign and therefore belonged to the accused himself. PW13, the assistant treasurer of Armada, was found to have held the RM120,000 in trust for the accused, not for the donors. The Court of Appeal also indicated that the trial judge erred in considering the transfer of money into the accused's personal account as evidence of misappropriation.
Findings on Ownership of the RM120,000

The Court of Appeal's judgment, delivered by Judge Noorin Badaruddin, explicitly stated that there was no evidence presented to demonstrate that the RM120,000 belonged to ABBE. While the funds were deposited into ABBE's account, the prosecution failed to lead evidence to establish this ownership. The court noted that the funds originated from the accused's appeal to donors for assistance with his election expenses.
Role of PW13 and the ABBE Account

The evidence from PW13 indicated that the ABBE account was used to hold the money intended for the accused's use. PW13 testified that the account belonged to ABBE but did not claim ownership of the RM120,000 deposited within it. The Court of Appeal concluded that PW13 held these funds in trust for the accused, as the money was merely in transit through the ABBE account.
Trial Judge's Error in Considering Account Transfer

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge made an error by taking into consideration the facts of the money's transfer into the accused's personal account. The appellate court reasoned that if the funds were indeed intended for the accused's political campaign, as the trial judge had also found, then the accused was legally entitled to the money. Even a mistaken belief in entitlement, the court suggested, would not constitute the offence of dishonest misappropriation under Section 403 of the Penal Code.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Did the Court of Appeal find evidence the RM120,000 belonged to ABBE?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends