Did the prosecution prove the core offence of criminal breach of trust?

Question

Accepted Answer

No, the prosecution did not prove the core offence of criminal breach of trust.

The Federal Court majority held that the prosecution failed to establish all four charges tied to RM1 million in Armada funds, including the first charge of abetting criminal breach of trust. Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali said the withdrawal of funds alone did not amount to criminal breach of trust and that the Bersatu constitution was only an internal set of party rules, not law.
The majority found the main charge was not made out
Ruzima said the prosecution had failed to establish the principal offence of criminal breach of trust. Because that core offence was not proven, he said the abetment charge against Syed Saddiq also could not stand.
The Court of Appeal ruling was upheld by two judges
Ruzima and Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah agreed to dismiss the prosecution’s appeal, which left the Court of Appeal’s acquittal in place. The Federal Court decision was reached by a 2-1 majority.
One judge disagreed and would have convicted on three charges
Court of Appeal President Datuk Seri Abu Bakar Jais dissented and said the Court of Appeal had erred. He said the prosecution had proven dishonest misappropriation and money laundering, and he would have imposed prison terms, a cane sentence, and a RM5 million fine on the money laundering charges.
The ruling covered four linked charges
The case involved four criminal charges linked to RM1 million in Armada funds. Syed Saddiq was present in court with his legal team, and the decision was read after an earlier delay when Ruzima had fallen ill.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Did the prosecution prove the core offence of criminal breach of trust?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends