KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here dismissed former minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor’s application to hold in-camera proceedings for his RM2 million corruption trial in relation to his asset declaration.
Judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan ruled that Tengku Adnan had failed to convince the court that holding in-camera proceedings was for the purpose of “expediency in the interests of justice”.
“The trial must be seen to be conducted fairly. The public has a right to see what the court sees and what decisions the court makes,” he said, after hearing arguments from Tengku Adnan’s lawyer Tan Hock Chuan and deputy public prosecutor Julia Ibrahim.
Earlier, Tan sought the court’s indulgence to hold in-camera proceedings for Tengku Adnan in tendering and answering questions related to his asset declaration as the information was confidential.
“The asset declaration also concerns details of his family members. If the documents are made public, it may create hostility against him (Tengku Adnan) and his family,” he said, adding that the defence was willing to show the court and prosecution members the asset declaration documents.
Tan also said the defence had been adducing evidence throughout the trial that Tengku Adnan had no intention of obtaining the RM2 million, which was said to be a “political donation” for his own benefit.
Julia objected to the defence’s bid, saying there was no basis for them to ask for the in-camera proceedings and that asset declaration documents were not governed by any law.
“As the then member of the administration, the accused needed to comply with the code of ethics in making an asset declaration to the prime minister and nowhere in the code is it stated that asset declaration is a confidential document,” she said.
Tengku Adnan, commonly known as Ku Nan, is accused of receiving RM2 million from businessman Chai Kin Kong, who was Aset Kayamas’s director, despite knowing that the Chai’s companies had dealings with the federal territories ministry which was under him at the time.
In his defence, he said he did not benefit from Chai’s RM2 million, which was paid to his company, Tadmansori Holdings Sdn Bhd, in 2016 as the money was meant as a “political donation” for two by-elections in Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar.
The hearing continues.