Defence trial of Bung Moktar, wife postponed to Sept 2
Judge Rosli Ahmad decided this after allowing an application by lawyer Teh See Khoon, representing Zizie Izette, for the hearing, which had been set for today, to be postponed due to the absence of lead counsel Datuk Seri K. Kumaraendran.
"Datuk Kumaraendran is unwell… and he is still undergoing treatment," said Teh, who is handling the case with lawyer M. Athimulan, representing Bung Moktar.
The court also vacated the trial dates, which had been set for today and tomorrow.
Deputy public prosecutor Law Chin How, however, objected to the application.
Last May 22, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, led by Justice Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali, unanimously dismissed the couple's application for leave to review the decision ordering them to enter their defence on the corruption charges.
Justice Che Mohd Ruzima, who sat with Court of Appeal judges Datuk Azizul Azmi Adnan and Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid, said the couple failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances or a miscarriage of justice that would justify a review of the ruling.
On Nov 18 last year, a Court of Appeal panel led by Justice Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim allowed the prosecution's appeal and overturned the High Court's decision to acquit Bung Moktar and Zizie Izette, ordering both to enter their defence.
Bung Moktar, 65, who was then the non-executive chairman of Felcra Bhd, was charged on May 3, 2019, with two charges of accepting bribes of RM2.2 million and RM262,500 as an inducement to obtain Felcra's approval to invest RM150 million in Public Mutual unit trusts.
He was alleged to have accepted the bribes from Public Mutual Bhd's investment agent Madhi Abdul Hamid through Zizie Izette, 46, at Public Bank Taman Melawati Branch, Kuala Lumpur, between 12.30pm and 5pm on June 12, 2015.
Bung Moktar was also charged with receiving RM337,500 in cash from Unit Amanah consultant, Norhaili Ahmad Mokhtar, under the name of Zizie Izette for the same reason and place on June 19, 2015, while Zizie Izette was charged with three counts of abetting her husband over the matter at the same place, date and time.– Bernama
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysiakini
6 hours ago
- Malaysiakini
Gov't to take 'offensive', 'annoys' ruling to Federal Court
PARLIAMENT | Putrajaya intends to appeal a Court of Appeal ruling declaring two words under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998 - 'offensive' and 'annoys' - as unconstitutional. Confirming that he was informed of the Attorney-General's Chambers' (AGC) plan to appeal the ruling, Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil (Harapan-Lembah Pantai) clarified that the words have been refined under amendments brought under his leadership. 'Regarding the Court of Appeal's decision, I was informed that...
The Sun
10 hours ago
- The Sun
Court for Children closed-door sessions protect minors in Malaysia
KUALA LUMPUR: Court for Children proceedings in Malaysia are conducted behind closed doors to safeguard minors' welfare and ensure fair trials. Only immediate family members, lawyers, deputy public prosecutors, and court staff can attend these sessions. The public and media are denied access to protect children's safety and confidentiality. Former Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Yaacob Md Sam explained the court's establishment under Section 11 of the Child Act 2001. 'Children accused of committing criminal offences will face charges under laws such as the Penal Code,' he stated. 'Cases will be registered and tried in accordance with Act 611, the Child Act 2001.' He emphasized that revealing child offenders' identities constitutes an offence under the Act. Former Magistrate Ahmad Shamil Azad highlighted Section 15 restrictions on media reporting. 'Section 15 prohibits the media from reporting names, addresses or personal details of child offenders,' he said. Media cannot publish photographs of children under 18 involved in court cases. Section 12 requires cases to be held behind closed doors with limited attendance. 'The public is not permitted to enter to protect the identity and safety of the children,' he added. Media cannot cover proceedings inside the courtroom during sessions. Journalists typically wait for statements from family or lawyers after proceedings conclude. Section 90(1) requires charges to be explained to children in simple language. 'If the child is represented by a lawyer, the responsibility may be delegated,' Ahmad Shamil noted. This ensures children understand charges and available options. The court will inquire about the child's plea preference during proceedings. For unrepresented children, the court may assist by asking trial-related questions. Children must be accompanied by their mother or guardian throughout court proceedings. Failure to appear may result in punishment under Section 88(2) of the Act. Penalties include a maximum fine of RM5,000 or imprisonment up to two years. Former Magistrate Nur'Aminahtul Mardiah Md Nor addressed media ethics. 'Ethical journalists must refrain from photographing child offenders,' she stated. Disclosing identifying information constitutes an offence under Section 15(1). Violations carry a maximum fine of RM10,000 or imprisonment up to five years. Former Deputy Public Prosecutor Abdul Khaliq Nazeri discussed offence types. 'Child offenders face charges including drug use, theft, and sexual crimes,' he said. Special procedures ensure children are not handcuffed and do not sit in the dock. - Bernama
The Sun
10 hours ago
- The Sun
Chinese student ordered psychiatric exam for attempted murder charges
KAJANG: The Sessions Court has mandated a psychiatric evaluation for a foreign student facing multiple violent charges. Liu Ting, a 24-year-old Chinese national, must undergo one month of assessment at Hospital Bahanga Ulu Kinta. Sessions Court Judge Normastura Ayub and Magistrate Fatin Dayana Jalil approved the prosecution's application for examination. Deputy Public Prosecutor Faelly Jeffrey Lanjungan noted the accused appeared confused during proceedings. Prosecutor Siti Nur Alia Safri stated Liu seemed not to understand the charges read against her. Bail was denied due to the serious and non-bailable nature of the accusations. The case mention is scheduled for September 19 following the psychiatric review. Liu pleaded not guilty to three charges of attempted murder in the Sessions Court. These charges involved two men aged 19 and 21 and a 35-year-old woman. Section 307 of the Penal Code applies, carrying potential 10-year imprisonment and fines. Causing injury under this section increases maximum sentencing to 20 years. Two additional charges involve causing grievous hurt with a knife. A 60-year-old woman suffered slashing wounds to her right arm. A 27-year-old man was stabbed in the stomach during the incident. Section 326 of the Penal Code governs these charges with 20-year maximum imprisonment. The Magistrate's Court heard three further charges of causing injury. Two men aged 21 and 49 were allegedly attacked with a knife. A 53-year-old woman was also injured in the same series of events. Liu remained silent when these three charges were read through an interpreter. Section 324 of the Penal Code applies to these final charges. This section allows for up to 10 years imprisonment, fines, or whipping upon conviction. All eight offenses occurred on August 13 between 11:39 AM and noon. Locations included Jalan Besar and Semenyih Persimpangan Metropoint junction. Additional incidents took place at premises within the Metropoint Complex. A viral social media video previously showed the initial accident scene. Footage depicted a woman exiting her vehicle while holding a knife. Several injured motorcyclists were visible in the circulated recording. Bystanders attempted to restrain the woman during the unfolding incident. - Bernama
