Not far from one’s memory, there was a tug of war in Parliament. After one cheeky remark to another, a push and pull ensued. Radzi Jidin, a Member of Parliament led the call – “Tarik balik! Tarik balik!” which was directed at Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who was struggling to explain the Attorney General’s (AG) rationale for withdrawing the 47 corruption charges against Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi.
Sometime in September 2023, Zahid Hamidi was granted a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on the request of the Prosecution. Whilst this means that Zahid Hamidi is a free man for now, it also means that he could be later charged for the same offences. This is provided under Section 254(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Right after news broke out of the AG’s withdrawal of the 47 charges, all hell broke loose both outside and inside of Parliament, with various quarters blaming Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim for going soft on his Deputy and corruption as a whole.
This, of course, sparked a controversy and speculation as to whether the AG acted impartially or if he was directed / influenced by the Prime Minister. The uproar is not without reason.
The AG derives his power and roles under Article 145 of the Federal Constitution. Specifically, under Article 145(3), the AG has the discretion to, among others, institute or discontinue any criminal proceedings against anyone who commits a crime, including any members of the Executive.
What many may not be aware of is that the AG is also the chief legal advisor to the Government of the day (a member of the Executive branch) and is appointed by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister (Article 145(1)), which arguably implies that the position is influenced by the Executive branch.
It therefore not unreasonable to question how the AG may discharge his prosecutorial duties independently when it comes to criminal action against the very folks who are responsible for his appointment? Ergo, the conflict of interest inherent in the AG’s decision to withdraw charges against Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi.
There have been steady calls for the demarcation of the AG’s advisory role from its prosecutorial role. Ideally, this would ensure transparency and that any prosecution of a member of the Executive would be independent of any possible external factors, however so denied.
It remains to be seen whether the above reform will materialise, or if the situation will remain as it is. In the meantime, the push and pull continues inside an outside of Parliament, while some conveniently escape the long arms of the law.
About the Author
Afiq Iskandar is a Legal Associate of XK Law. He graduated from MARA University of Technology, Malaysia. Afiq has multiple interests in life beyond reading law viz. sports, film, music and poetry. He believes that art, in whatever form they may be, is a necessity of life.
