KUALA LUMPUR: Toh Puan Na'imah Abdul Khalid has failed in her bid to retrieve her passport permanently after the High Court here dismissed her application.
In his dismissal, Justice Ahmad Bache said there was no injustice in the Sessions Court's decision when it imposed additional conditions regarding Na'imah's passport.
"It is not illegal, it is not wrong. In fact, it is permissible.
"If I may add, it is in fact effective in some cases for the court to impound the passport as a form of security," he said here on Friday (March 22).
The judge noted that Na'imah's husband Tun Daim Zainuddin was also charged at the Sessions Court but was allowed to hold on to his passport.
He said if Na'imah's passport was released, there was a possibility that both husband and wife would go abroad and not return.
"There is an increased risk of them being a flight risk. Consequently, they would not be here to face the proceedings and their charges.
"The additional condition is to ensure confidently that they both would be in court," he said.
On whether or not the Sessions Court decision had contravened Na'imah's rights under the Federal Constitution, Justice Ahmad said those rights as a citizen changed after she was charged in court.
"The circumstances changed from a normal citizen to an accused.
"Her absolute right to her passport has changed," he added.
Justice Ahmad also said the Sessions Court's decision on Na'imah's passport was valid, fair and there was no injustice.
"This court affirms the lower court's decision and dismisses this application," he said.
The judge added that Na'imah could liaise with the prosecution if she needed access to her passport in the event she wanted to go abroad.
On Jan 23, Na'imah, 67, claimed trial at the Sessions Court for failing to comply with a notice by not declaring her assets.
She is currently out on RM250,000 bail and had to surrender her passport to the court as part of the bail conditions.
She filed the revision application at the High Court to revise the Sessions Court's decision regarding her passport.
Na'imah claimed the prosecution had failed to give any good reason for the court to take away her travel document.
She claimed the Sessions Court's order was a miscarriage of justice and should be revised and that her right to her passport is a constitutional right in accordance with Articles 5(1) and 9 of the Federal Constitution.
