CPC allows MACC to remand suspects, court rules

PETALING JAYA: The High Court in Johor Bahru has ruled that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) can rely on Section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to remand suspects for further investigation.

 

In his ruling today, Justice Abu Bakar Katar said it must be borne in mind that the legislature passed the MACC Act in 2009 for the law enforcement agency to fight corruption effectively.

 

Abu Bakar, however, did not make any further order in the case since the suspect was freed following the magistrate’s refusal to allow for the remand.

 

The judge was hearing a revision application by 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.

 

In that case, Justice Roslan Mat Nor had ruled that MACC could not rely on provisions in the CPC to remand suspects for investigation purposes.

 

Roslan said MACC could detain a person for up to 24 hours but must seek a remand order under Section 49(4) of the MACC Act for a longer detention period.

 

However, Abu Bakar took a different view. He said the magistrate who made the decision based on Roslan’s ruling failed to appreciate that Section 49(2) of the MACC Act does not contain any specific provision allowing the remand of a suspect after 24 hours.

 

“MACC has the option to apply for remand to detain a suspect under Section 117 of the CPC without relying on Section 49(2) of the MACC Act,” he said.

 

He said Section 49(2) read together with Section 29(3) of the MACC Act gives an investigator “all the powers of investigation provided for under this Act and the Criminal Procedure Code”.

 

That means that after a report is made, an MACC investigating officer may rely on both the MACC Act and the CPC to begin an investigation if he has reason to believe that an offence has been committed, he said.

 

In his 18-page grounds of judgment, Abu Bakar said he had carried out the revision exercise under section 323 of the CPC to determine whether the magistrate was correct in her decision.

 

He said deputy public prosecutor Wan Shahruddin Wan Ladin had cited a 2010 case of the Ipoh High Court which ruled that other law enforcement agencies apart from police could rely on section 117 of the CPC to secure a remand order to probe suspects.

 

Wan Shahruddin had also pointed out to Abu Bakar that the MACC investigating officer had relied on the Ipoh court to obtain the remand, but the magistrate insisted on relying on the Temerloh court ruling.

 

However, Abu Bakar noted that based on court records, the magistrate did not consider the Ipoh court ruling when dismissing the remand application.

 

He said the magistrate had the choice of following either the Ipoh or Temerloh ruling, but ought to have considered both.

 

He also said it was not mandatory under section 49(2) of the MACC Act for an MACC investigation officer to release a suspect on bond.

 

“The MACC under exceptional circumstances could detain suspects and not be tied to section 49(2), ” he said.

 

Abu Bakar also noted that under section 10(5) of the MACC Act, both MACC and police officers had similar powers when carrying out duties under the MACC Act.

 

In contrast, Roslan, in a 43-page judgment delivered on May 11, said Section 49, when read in its entirety, only permits an arrest to be made at the tail-end of an investigation.

 

He said while the MACC Act allows a person to be arrested, the suspect must be freed on bail or bond if investigations were incomplete.

 

However, he can be rearrested without a warrant if bail conditions are breached, he said.

 

Roslan said MACC may detain the person for up to 24 hours and must seek a remand order under Section 49(4) of the MACC Act for a longer detention period.

 

In normal criminal investigations, an investigating authority would apply to a magistrate under Section 117 of the CPC to extend a suspect’s remand for seven to 14 days.

 

MACC has appealed Roslan’s ruling in the Court of Appeal and a hearing date is scheduled to be fixed on July 21 during case management.

 

 

Source: FMT