1MDB: High Court cannot order AG to initiate prosecution

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court ruled that it cannot order the Attorney-General (AG) to initiate a criminal investigation in relation to the judicial review in the case involving 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), last year.
The decision by High Court judge (Appellate and Special Powers) Justice Hanipah Farikullah in a written judgment was made available to the media, today.
Hanipah stated that Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution provides the AG a wide discretionary scope to either initiate or halt any criminal proceedings.
As such, Hanipah also agreed with the submissions from the senior federal counsel that Article 145 (3) is a special provision which empowers the AG to initiate, conduct or discontinue proceedings for a criminal offence (other than proceedings in the syariah courts, customary courts and military courts).
In her judgment, Hanipah pointed out that counsel for Datuk Seri Khairuddin Abu Hassan, Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla had submitted that AG Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali who was appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the Prime Minister was in a conflict of interest situation to decide whether to prosecute Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak in the 1MDB case and related cases.
"However, I think the issue involving conflict of interest as contended by counsel for the applicant does not arise when the AG in this case has decided not to charge the Prime Minister.
"The impact and meaning of Article 145 (3) has long been decided by the judgment of the Federal Court which decides the AG's decision not to initiate criminal prosecution, can not be judged or challenged through judicial review," she added.
Last year, Hanipah rejected the application for leave submitted by Khairuddin who wants to set aside the AG's decision on Jan 26, 2016 that there was no criminal offence committed by Najib over three investigation papers by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
Through the decision made in the judge's chambers, the High Court accepted the AG's explanation in his affidavit that the decision to close the case involved was an administrative decision.