Johor Baru High Court rules MACC can use Section 117 of Criminal Procedure Code for remand purposes

JOHOR BARU, July 12 — The High Court here today ruled that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) can rely on Section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to remand suspects under the MACC Act 2009 for further investigation.

In his ruling today, High Court Judge Datuk Abu Bakar Katar said that when conducting its investigation, the MACC can obtain a remand application under Section 117 of the CPC as Parliament had enacted the MACC Act to tackle corruption effectively.

He added that the provisions under Section 49 of the Act cannot be read rigidly to the point that it affects the commission’s investigations.

“The court also feels that the provisions of Section 49 of the Act need to be read with Section 29(3) of the same Act during investigations, which allows for remand applications under Section 117 of the CPC,” he said in his judgment.

Abu Bakar was hearing a revision application by the MACC after a magistrate refused to allow the detention of a suspect pending investigations into his alleged use of forged documents to obtain an undisclosed amount of money from the Social Security Organisation (Socso) during the Covid-19 lockdown based on a Temerloh High Court ruling in May.

Later, outside the courtroom, MACC (Legal and Prosecution Division) director Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin said the anti-graft agency was pleased with the decision.

He said the Johor Baru High Court had discussed in depth the process that allows the MACC to remand suspects under Section 117 of the CPC.

“The Johor Baru High Court’s decision provides an important application of the law regarding remand procedures and it is clear that the MACC is not actually bound by Section 49 of the MACC Act 2009 following the earlier decision by the Temerloh High Court,” he told reporters when met outside the High Court here today.

“The Johor Baru High Court today discussed the application of the CPC which from the beginning of the MACC investigation process allowed us to use the provisions of Section 29 of the MACC Act 2009 and Section 117 of the CPC,” he said when met at the High Court here today.

Wan Shaharuddin said he hopes that after this, magistrates will examine in depth the Johor Baru High Court’s decision to allow remand applications.

“Many magistrates say they are bound by the decision of the Temerloh High Court. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but what we want is an understanding of the law to be applied which is not just according to the High Court’s decision.

“We hope that after this we can carry out our investigations more thoroughly with today’s decision and there will be no more issues in the future,” he said.

Last Friday, it was reported that the MACC failed in its bid for a revision against the Kuantan Magistrate’s Court decision which rejected its application to obtain a remand order against a 53-year-old district police chief to assist in a corruption case involving more than RM1 million.

Temerloh High Court judge Datuk Zainal Azman Ab Aziz dismissed the MACC’s application to review the magistrate court’s decision to deny the remand order on the suspect under Section 117 of the CPC on June 7.

He said he found that the magistrate had made no error in law or procedures.

Previously, on June 7, the Kuantan Magistrate’s Court rejected a remand application by the MACC against the district police chief.

The senior police officer is being investigated for more than RM1 million in bribes he allegedly received between 2017 and 2022 in exchange for protecting unlicensed entertainment outlets and massage parlours in Temerloh.

The MACC filed for a review of the magistrate’s court decision on June 21 and named the district police chief as the respondent.

On May 11, Temerloh High Court judicial commissioner Roslan Mat Nor said the MACC could not use Section 117 of the CPC when applying for a remand order due to the restrictions under Section 67 of the MACC Act 2009.

The MACC then filed an appeal against the Temerloh High Court decision on May 15 that ruled the national anti-graft agency must rely on its own Act when remanding a suspect.