High Court’s decision to grant Zahid DNAA will be manipulated by certain groups, says defence

PETALING JAYA: There will be groups who will manipulate the High Court’s decision to grant a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) against deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi for their own agenda, says Ahmad Zahid’s defence team.

“Following the Attorney General’s decision, we believe that it is likely to be manipulated by certain parties.

“We wish to emphasise that the Attorney General is only exercising his discretion as provided under Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution,” Ahmad Zahid’s lawyer Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Zainal said outside the High Court on Monday (Sept 4).

ALSO READ: Defence team to appeal for Zahid’s full acquittal, says Hisyam Teh

According to Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution, the Attorney-General has the discretion to decide whether to institute, conduct, or discontinue any proceedings for an offence.

The statement noted that the prosecution filing a discharge is normal as long as the Attorney-General could accept the reasons given by the accused through the representations given.

“This process of representation is not a new thing as it has already become a practice previously, regardless of what stage of a trial is in from the Magistrate’s Court up to the Federal Court and this includes cases involving mandatory death penalty,” Ahmad Zaidi read.

ALSO READ: High Court grants Zahid discharge not amounting to acquittal in YAB case

Ahmad Zahid was granted a DNAA for all 47 graft charges involving Yayasan Akalbudi funds by the High Court after Deputy Public Prosecutor Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar applied for the charges against Zahid to be dropped at the onset of the hearing on Monday morning.

This was after the Attorney General’s Chambers accepted a letter sent by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) seeking a review of the charges against Ahmad Zahid on Feb 20 2023, according to Ahmad Zahid’s lawyers’ statement.

Ahmad Zaidi also noted the trial court’s proceedings at the High Court had been conducted in a transparent manner with regards to the evidence adduced and witnesses testimony acquired, which had led to the High Court’s decision on Monday.