Top cop’s lawyer case: Defence allowed to challenge graft notice
By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal, The Malaysian Insider
The question of motive is still playing out as a central theme surrounding the case of lawyer Rosli Dahlan, with the Sessions Court ruling today that the defence could question a deputy public prosecutor on his motive in issuing a corruption notice.
The court dismissed the prosecution’s application to disallow the defence team from questioning DPP Anthony Kevin Morais.
“The court hereby rejects the prosecution’s application. The case will carry on,” said Sessions Court judge Abu Bakar Katar.
The ruling allows the defence to challenge the validity of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) notice issued by Morais which under the law compels a person to disclose the assets he owns.
Yesterday, Rosli’s lawyer Datuk K. Kumaraendran had claimed that the notice was a “set up” to trap Rosli.
In his arguments a day earlier, the defence lawyer said the ACA had no valid reason to issue the notice after Morais admitted, under cross-examination, that Rosli’s name had not been mentioned by the person who had accused former Commercial Crimes Investigation (CCID) director Datuk Ramli Yusuff of corruption.
Rosli had been acting then for Ramli in the latter’s corruption case.
In his testimony yesterday, Morais claimed that Rosli, who had a close relationship with the cop, would be able to provide evidence to successfully prosecute Ramli.
Rosli had been charged two years ago under section 3(1)(b) of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 for “deliberately” not complying with the terms of a notice issued by graft busters who wanted him to spill the beans on what assets he owned, in an effort to connect him to an investigation which involved Ramli two years ago.
If convicted, he may be jailed for up to 20 years and fined a maximum RM100,000.
