KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here has set Dec 9 to hear former Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin and his family’s judicial review application seeking to have their bank accounts unfrozen by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
Federal counsel Mohammad Sallehuddin Md Ali, representing the Attorney-General’s Chambers, confirmed that the date was set by deputy registrar Siti Nur Hafizah Mohd Sokran during an online case management (ereview) session on Thursday (Aug 8).
“The application will be heard before Judge Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid,” Mohammad Sallehuddin said when contacted.
The proceedings were also attended by lawyer Muhammad Firdaus Shaik Alauddin, who is representing Daim and his family.
In their application, filed on June 6, Daim and his family are seeking an order to set aside the MACC’s action in seizing their movable assets, under Section 50 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorist Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLATFPUAA).
Apart from Daim, the applicants include his wife, Toh Puan Na’imah Abdul Khalid; and their four children, Asnida, Wira Dani, Muhammed Amir Zainuddin, and Muhammed Amin Zainuddin.
Eighteen companies are also named as applicants including Aad Equity Sdn Bhd; Yayasan Haji Zainuddin; Ilham Baru Sdn Bhd; Anchor Point Sdn Bhd; Kangkung Catering Sdn Bhd; Adrihaniz Sdn Bhd; Syarikat Maluri Sdn Bhd; Amiraz Sdn Bhd; Ridana Sdn Bhd; Daan Sdn Bhd; Maya Seni Holdings Sdn Bhd; Magical Zone Sdn Bhd; Permatang Maju (M) Sdn Bhd; Brainstorms Sdn Bhd; Arida Farms Sdn Bhd; Gajah3 Resource Centre Sdn Bhd; Ilham Tower Sdn Bhd, and Selidik Jaya Sdn Bhd.
All the applicants named MACC Money Laundering and Asset Forfeiture Division assistant superintendent Haris Fadhila Sukaime; MACC Anti-Money Laundering Prevention Division director Datuk Mohamad Zamri Zainul Abidin; MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki; MACC; Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim; and the Government of Malaysia, as the first to sixth respondents.
They also sought a declaration that the seizure of movable assets, imposed by the MACC under Section 50 of the AMLATFPUAA 2001, and all actions and decisions taken by the first to fourth respondents are invalid and void.
On March 4, the initial judicial review application filed by Daim and his family, regarding the MACC investigation against them, was struck out by the High Court here, on the grounds that the applicants had failed to prove malicious intent by the MACC officers conducting the investigation.- Bernama
