PUTRAJAYA, Feb 5 — The Federal Court will deliver its verdict on February 10 on the prosecution’s appeal against former FELDA chairman Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad’s acquittal on nine corruption charges involving RM3.09 million.
A three-member panel, led by Federal Court judge Datuk Nordin Hassan, said the court required time to consider the submissions from both parties, as well as to review the earlier Court of Appeal judgment.
“The decision is fixed for February 10 at 9am,” he announced.
The bench, which also included justices Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali, had heard oral arguments from both the prosecution and defence earlier in the proceedings.
The appeal stems from the Court of Appeal’s ruling on March 6, 2024, which overturned the High Court’s conviction of Isa and the subsequent sentence of six years’ imprisonment and an RM15.45 million fine.
On February 3, 2021, the High Court convicted Isa, 77, on nine counts of corruption. The offences were alleged to have taken place on the 49th floor of Menara FELDA, Platinum Park, Persiaran KLCC, between July 15, 2014, and December 15, 2015.
The former Negeri Sembilan menteri besar was accused of accepting RM3.09 million in gratification from Ikhwan Zaidel, then a director of Gegasan Abadi Properties Sdn Bhd, through his former special officer Muhammad Zahid Md Arip.
The payment was allegedly an inducement for approving the FELDA Investment Corporation Sdn Bhd’s (FICSB) purchase of the Merdeka Palace Hotel & Suites in Kuching, Sarawak, for RM160 million.
During today’s appeal hearing, submissions from both parties lasted about 43 minutes.
Deputy public prosecutor Afzainizam Abdul Aziz characterised the case as one of being “innocently asked for, but corruptly received”.
He contended that the prosecution had established that Isa accepted gratification on nine separate occasions from Ikhwan via his former special officer between July 2014 and December 2015.
The prosecutor further submitted that evidence was adduced showing that, following a meeting with Ikhwan, Isa had indirectly instructed Zahid to solicit a bribe from him, an instruction Zahid subsequently carried out.
Afzainizam argued that the bribes were delivered by Ikhwan to Zahid, who then passed them on to Isa in stages at his office in FELDA.
He submitted that the Court of Appeal had erred in overturning the High Court’s judgment and urged the Federal Court to reinstate Isa’s conviction on all corruption charges.
He further contended that, while the investigation had not located the bribe money in Isa’s possession, such physical discovery was not a requisite element for proving a charge of receiving gratification under established legal principles.
In response, Isa’s counsel, Athimulan Muruthiah, submitted that the Court of Appeal had committed no error of law in reversing the High Court’s finding of guilt against his client.
“The Court of Appeal’s finding that there was no credible evidence Isa had approved, directed or influenced the FICSB board’s decision demolishes the prosecution’s case altogether.
“This is a finding of fact that the prosecution failed to prove the respondent (Isa) committed the alleged act for which the gratification was purportedly received,” he said.
Athimulan countered that the Court of Appeal was correct in finding the trial judge’s conclusion that Isa’s request to convey his “salam” was a coded demand for gratification to be speculative and lacking direct evidentiary support.
