KUALA LUMPUR: Former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin was baffled at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) for investigating an alleged offence dating back more than two decades.
Former attorney-general Tan Sri Tommy Thomas, who appeared for the 85-year-old former politician, described the MACC's probe as tardy and delayed to a wholly unacceptable level.
He said the anti-graft body is investigating his client for an offence under Section 23 of the MACC Act and Section 4(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (AMLA).
"The allegation of a Section 23 MACC Act offence was first made known to Daim and his family members on June 7, last year.
"This is significant because Section 23 of the MACC Act would only apply to Daim when he held public office.
"Hence, the investigations are the antithesis of a speedy one, as the law requires," he said in his submission to seek leave to initiate judicial review against MACC's probe against his client.
Daim, who also headed the Council of Eminent Persons during Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's time as prime minister under the Pakatan Harapan administration, retired from politics in 2001.
Thomas also asserted that his client would not have a fair trial.
"No fair trial of a 'white collar' crime can be held 22 years after the event.
"Most importantly, any accused would be severely prejudiced by the loss of memory and records of events which occurred a quarter of a century ago.
"Further, the prosecution would never be able to produce original documents to establish any offence which allegedly occurred over 22 years ago," he said.
Thomas said Daim and his family are adversely affected by MACC's protracted investigations and seizures over the course of a year, with still no disclosure as to what is alleged against him, cannot be overemphasised.
He also contended that if the exercise of the public prosecutor's discretion to charge, prescribed under Article 145 of the Federal Constitution, is amenable to judicial review, the same prosecutorial principles must apply as against statutory investigative powers.
Meanwhile, Senior Federal Counsel Shamsul Bolhassan argued that the freezing order issued by the MACC is not amendable to judicial review.
"Law enforcement agencies are vested with the power to issue an order to freeze a person's property upon the fulfillment of some conditions.
"The subsection highlights that the issuance of a freezing order is only made when an enforcement agency has commenced an investigation against the person and there is reasonable ground to suspect either that the person commits or is about to commit a terrorism financing offence, or that the property is the proceeds from an unlawful activity," he said.
He said if the court allows judicial review against the exercise of functions related to criminal investigations, it will open the floodgates to challenge every other exercise of such functions, potentially leading to chaos and public disorder.
"Those powers are investigative powers which cannot be challenged and if it is to be allowed it will hamper the investigative process.
"For every investigation, a judicial review will be filed.
"Hence, the investigation would not be completed," he said.
Judge Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh then fixed March 4 to deliver his verdict.
The applicants claimed that the anti-graft body has no reasonable cause to investigate them under the MACC Act or the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001.
The applicants are seeking a certiorari order against the MACC to quash all investigations instituted against Daim and his family members and all notices issued by the commission.
On Dec 23 last year, the MACC confirmed it is investigating Daim over allegations of corruption and money-laundering.