Judicial Commissioner Rofiah Mohamad, in her brief judgment, stated that the doctrine of autrefois acquit or rule against double jeopardy argued by the defense did not apply as it did not meet the requirements.
She noted that the court found significant differences between the charges in the first proceeding (the purchase of a bungalow by Lim on Jalan Pinhorn) and today's case.
"This includes differences in the dates of the alleged offenses; the position/status of the accused at the time of the alleged offenses; the bribes alleged to have been given for the benefit of different parties, the actions alleged to have been taken by the accused to commit the offenses are different, and the types of offenses are also different.
"Therefore, the condition for the application of the doctrine, which is that the charges are the same or involve the same facts and evidence and should have been dealt with in the first proceeding, is not fulfilled. There are significant differences in the allegations of the offenses. Therefore, the case must proceed," she said.
On May 26, 2023, Lim, Chew, and Phang filed an application to strike out the corruption and money laundering charges on the grounds that the prosecution used evidence from a previous case involving Lim's purchase of a bungalow on Jalan Pinhorn, even though he was acquitted and discharged in 2018.
Rofiah clarified that in the initial proceedings, despite the testimony of 25 prosecution witnesses, no findings were made or facts proven concerning the guilt or innocence of the accused.
"The acquittal and discharge of the accused in the initial proceedings stemmed from the prosecution's decision to halt or refrain from pursuing the accused's prosecution by withdrawing the charges during the continuation hearing stage.
"The acquittal was not upon a judicial adjudication by the court on the available evidence in the first trial or in other words the order of acquittal was not based on merit," she said, subsequently setting July 26 for case management.
Deputy public prosecutors Syed Faisal Syed Amir, Ashrof Adrin Kamarul, and Shafiq Hasim appeared for the prosecution.
Lim, Chew, and Pang's defense team was led by Datuk V Sithambaram, and included RSN Rayer, Ramkarpal Singh, P. Thandayuthabany, and A. Ruebankumar.
He is accused of committing the offense by acting to ensure Magnificent Emblem Sdn Bhd was awarded the Invitation to Propose a Workers' Settlement on Lot 631, Mukim 13, Juru, Seberang Perai Tengah and part of Lot 282, Mukim 13, Batu Kawan, Seberang Perai Selatan in Penang valued at RM11,610,000, in which Chew had an indirect interest.
Lim, who is the Bagan member of parliament, allegedly committed the offense between Aug 19, 2013, and March 3, 2016, at the Chief Minister's Office, Level 28, Komtar in George Town, Penang.
He was charged under Section 23(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009, which carries a maximum prison sentence of 20 years and a fine of not less than five times the value of the gratification or RM10,000, whichever is higher, upon conviction.
Phang, on the other hand, was charged with allegedly conspiring to commit the offence with Lim at the same place and date.
She is accused of committing the offences between Oct 7, 2013 and Aug 4, 2014; between Sept 3, 2014 and Aug 11, 2015; and between Sept 4, 2015 and March 3, 2016, at Public Bank Berhad, Taman Melaka Raya Branch, Melaka.
The charges were framed under Section 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001, which is punishable by a fine not exceeding RM5 million or imprisonment of up to five years, or both, upon conviction.
Approached by reporters, Rayer said they would examine the rationale for the High Court judgment before filing an appeal at the Court of Appeal, and also apply to suspend the High Court trial pending the appeal.
-- BERNAMA
