How did the Federal Court view the Bersatu constitution in relation to the charges?

Question

Accepted Answer

Federal Court Ruled Bersatu Constitution Not Law in Relation to Charges

The Federal Court, in a 2-1 majority decision, upheld the acquittal of Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman on charges related to RM1 million in Armada funds. In his judgment, Federal Court judge Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali stated that the Bersatu constitution is not considered law but rather a set of internal rules governing the political party's members. Consequently, non-compliance with these party rules would typically attract disciplinary action rather than constitute a legal offence.
Majority Dismissed Prosecution's Appeal

Federal Court judges Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali and Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah formed the majority that dismissed the prosecution's appeal. Their decision affirmed the Court of Appeal's earlier ruling that had acquitted Syed Saddiq on all four charges. Justice Ruzima specifically found that the Court of Appeal had correctly concluded the prosecution had failed to establish the elements of all four charges brought against the Muar MP.
Dissenting Opinion on Charges

Court of Appeal President Datuk Seri Abu Bakar Jais dissented from the majority, expressing the view that Syed Saddiq should have been convicted on three of the four charges. In his dissenting judgment, Abu Bakar stated that the prosecution had successfully proven the charges of dishonest misappropriation and money laundering. He indicated that, in his view, a sentence of six months' imprisonment and one stroke of the cane would have been appropriate for the misappropriation charge, along with six months' imprisonment and a RM5 million fine for each of the two money laundering charges.
Failure to Establish Principal Offence

Justice Ruzima's reasoning highlighted that the prosecution had not established the principal offence of criminal breach of trust. As a result, he concluded that the abetment charge against Syed Saddiq could not be proven. This finding was a crucial factor in the majority's decision to uphold the acquittal, as the abetment charge was contingent on the existence of the underlying criminal breach of trust.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

How did the Federal Court view the Bersatu constitution in relation to the charges?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends