JOHOR BARU: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) can now remand suspects under the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) for offences investigated under the MACC Act 2009, ruled the High Court here.
Calling the decision “a win for MACC”, its director (Legal and Prosecution Division), Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, said it also means that the commission is not bound only to Section 49 of the MACC Act 2009 when applying for a remand, as previously decided by the Temerloh High Court.
“The Johor Baru High Court has discussed in depth the process that allows the MACC to remand suspects under Section 117 of the CPC.
“Following the recent decision by the Temerloh High Court, which rejected MACC’s bid to obtain a remand order, many cases had also failed to see a remand application obtained.
“I am not saying that the Temerloh High Court erred in its judgment but I hope that after this, there will be no issue for MACC to obtain a remand application and the Johor Baru High Court’s decision (may be referred to) for future cases,” he said outside the courtroom yesterday.
Earlier in court, Justice Abu Bakar Katar handed down the decision, saying that when conducting its investigation, the MACC can obtain a remand application under Section 117 of the CPC.
He said the MACC, upon arresting a suspect, has the power to choose whether to obtain a remand application under Section 117 of the CPC or a bail in line with Section 49(2)(a), (b) or (c) of the Act.
“Parliament enacted the MACC Act to tackle corruption and that needed to be given priority.
“The provisions of Section 49 of the Act cannot be read rigidly to the point that they affect the commission’s investigation process.
“The court also feels that the provisions of Section 49 of the Act need to be read with Section 29(3) during its investigation, which allows for remand applications under Section 117 of the CPC,” he said in his judgement.
On July 7, the MACC failed in its bid for a revision against the Kuantan Magistrate’s Court decision which rejected its application to obtain a remand order against a district police chief to assist in a probe of suspected corruption involving more than RM1mil.
Temerloh High Court judge Justice Zainal Azman Ab Aziz said there was no need for him to interfere with the decision because the magistrate did not make a mistake and had made a right and proper decision.
He said the magistrate’s decision was based on the earlier decision of the Temerloh High Court which ruled that Section 117 of the CPC was not applicable to remand applications for offences investigated under the MACC Act 2009.
On May 11, Temerloh High Court Judicial Commissioner Roslan Mat Nor said the MACC should use its own Act and not rely on the CPC because Section 49 of the MACC Act 2009 empowers it to allow for bail to be deferred in order to continue investigations beyond the initial 24 hours of arrest.
Meanwhile, MACC deputy public prosecutor Law Chin How said the Court of Appeal will sit on July 20 to resolve the uncertainty following two contradictory High Court decisions on the issue.
“We want to solve this uncertainty.
“This is because having two contradictory decisions by two separate High Courts would mean that the lower courts can now follow either precedent,” he said when contacted by The Star yesterday.
Law was asked to clarify on the Johor Baru High Court’s decision yesterday which allows the graft-busting body to remand suspects under the CPC, which the Temerloh High Court had stated otherwise in May.
