KUALA LUMPUR: Toh Puan Na'imah Khalid, the wife of former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin, has arrived at the Kuala Lumpur Court Complex where she is to be charged with failure to declare assets.
Dressed in a light green baju kurung, she was accompanied by several men believed to be her lawyers.
She looked calm as she made her way into the complex lobby and did not say anything to the media.
She is expected to be charged under Section 36(2) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act for failure to declare her assets.
The act stipulates that any person given a notice by an officer of the Commission (of the rank of Commissioner and above under subsection (1) of the act must comply with the terms of the notice.
Naimah is facing maximum five years imprisonment and RM100,000 fine upon conviction.
Media personnel gathered at the court complex as early as 7am, waiting for her arrival.
They need to register themselves before being allowed to cover the trial via a live feed provided in a separate room.
Before Na'imah's arrival, several MACC officers also made their way into the building.
Yesterday, Naimah had lamented the fact that the MACC had insisted that she be charged today despite Daim being hospitalised and scheduled to undergo a medical procedure.
In a statement, she had said a team of MACC officers suddenly arrived at the hospital and demanded to record her statement despite having already taken her statement earlier on Jan 10.
She had said she had asked for the charge to be done tomorrow, the day after Daim completes his medical procedure, but this was refused.
Na'imah and her two sons, Amir and Amin, on Jan 10, were summoned to the MACC headquarters in Putrajaya to have their statements recorded.
MACC had said this was done to ascertain the worth of some of the high-value assets in the country and abroad held under the companies belonging to the family in relation to the probe on Daim.
The commission had said a notice was served to Daim under Section 36(1)(a) of the MACC Act 2009, on June 7 last year while his family members were served notices under Section 36(1)(b) of the same act.
The family's lawyers had described the entire questioning as "one giant fishing expedition", aimed at gathering information to charge Daim.