Jan 30 for decision to quash MACC notice
BernamaPublished: Jan 23, 2013 5:25 PM | Updated: Jan 23, 2013 6:24 PM
The Kuala Lumpur High Court today fixed Jan 30 for the decision on a judicial review application by two lawyers to quash a notice issued to them by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), in connection with investigations into a case involving the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC).
Lawyers Latheefa Koya and Murnie Hidayah contended that the notice was void and contravened provisions under Section 5(2) of the constitution.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court today fixed Jan 30 for the decision on a judicial review application by two lawyers to quash a notice issued to them by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), in connection with investigations into a case involving the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC).
Judge Zaleha Yusof set the date after hearing submissions from both parties.
Lawyers Latheefa Koya (left) and Murnie Hidayah, in their application, had named the MACC, Malaysian Government and MACC assistant superintendent Suziana Ali as respondents.
They contended that the notice, dated March 19, 2012 requiring them to be present at the MACC headquarters in Putrajaya on March 23 to assist in investigations involving NFC executive chairperson Dr Mohamad Salleh Ismail, was void and contravened provisions under Section 5(2) of the federal constitution.
The lawyers, who are representing former NFC consultant Shamsubahrin Ismail, claimed they were served the notice on the same day after accompanying their client to the MACC office to give his statement regarding Mohamad Salleh's case.
Failure to abide by the notice is an offence under Section 48(c) of the MACC Act 2009, punishable under Section 69 of the same Act, which carries a maximum RM10,000 fine or two years' jail or both, upon conviction.
- Bernama
Judge Zaleha Yusof set the date after hearing submissions from both parties.
Lawyers Latheefa Koya (left) and Murnie Hidayah, in their application, had named the MACC, Malaysian Government and MACC assistant superintendent Suziana Ali as respondents.They contended that the notice, dated March 19, 2012 requiring them to be present at the MACC headquarters in Putrajaya on March 23 to assist in investigations involving NFC executive chairperson Dr Mohamad Salleh Ismail, was void and contravened provisions under Section 5(2) of the federal constitution.
The lawyers, who are representing former NFC consultant Shamsubahrin Ismail, claimed they were served the notice on the same day after accompanying their client to the MACC office to give his statement regarding Mohamad Salleh's case.
Failure to abide by the notice is an offence under Section 48(c) of the MACC Act 2009, punishable under Section 69 of the same Act, which carries a maximum RM10,000 fine or two years' jail or both, upon conviction.
- Bernama
View Comments0