JUDGMENT

This is an appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the decision of the learned Sessions Court Judge given on the 18/03/1997 acquitting the Respondent of the charge preferred under Section 2(1) of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance No. 22 of 1970 ("Ordinance No. 22") without calling for his defence.

The Appellant advanced several grounds of appeal, namely (verbatim):

"3.1. Yang Arif Hakim telah khilaf dari segi undang-undang dan fakta apabila memutuskan bahawa pihak pendakwa telah gagal untuk membuktikan kesemua daripada intipati-intipati sepertimana yang terkandung di dalam pertuduhan.

3.2. Yang Arif Hakim telah khilaf dari segi undang-undang dan fakta apabila memutuskan bahawa Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan "cannot be said to be acting as a 'public body' for the purpose of Sec. 2 of the PCA".

3.3. Yang Arif Hakim telah khilaf dari segi undang-undang dan fakta apabila memutus bahawa Responden tidak boleh dianggap sebagai "public officer within the definition of Sec. 2 of PCA" dan sedangkan Yang Arif Hakim ada memutuskan bahawa "....... the prosecution in this case has led sufficient evidence to show that accused was in the permanent employment of the Council".

3.4. Keputusan Yang Arif Hakim adalah bercanggah dengan keberatan keterangan-keterangan (weight of evidences) yang telah dikemukakan oleh pihak pendakwa."

However, at the outset of the hearing of this appeal, the learned Deputy Public Prosecutor ("DPP") submitted that the grounds are inter-connected. As such, she focused on one issue, that is, that the learned Sessions Court Judge ("SCJ") erred in law and in fact to find that in relation to the issuance of the trading licence for the business of selling 4-Digit Lottery under the Trades Licencing Ordinance Cap. 144 (Sabah) ("TLO") the Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan ("MPS") was not a public body as defined under Section 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1961 ("PCA") and thereby concluding that the Respondent was not therefore a public officer as such

In order to appreciate the issue, I think it is appropriate to set out briefly the facts so far adduced in this case.

The amended charge preferred against the Respondent reads (verbatim):

"Bahawa kamu antara 28hb. Julai, 1992 hingga 30hb. Julai, 1992 di Pejabat Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan di dalam Daerah Sandakan, di dalam Negeri Sabah, sebagai seorang penjawat awam iaitu Timbalan Presiden Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan telah, semasa menjadi penjawat awam tersebut, melakukan perbuatan rasuah dengan menggunakan jawatan awam kamu itu untuk faedah kamu iaitu, kamu telah meluluskan satu lesen berniaga untuk menjalankan perniagaan 4 Digit Lottery Sale For 88 Lotteries Corporation kepada Syarikat Nasip beralamat di MDLB 1631, Taman Hin Wah, Batu 8, Jalan Labuk, Sandakan, di mana pada pengetahuan kamu, pada masa material syarikat tersebut dimiliki oleh adik kamu iaitu Leong Tsen Hin @ Robert dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum di bawah Seksyen 2 (1) Ordinan 22 (Kuasa-kuasa perlu) Dharurat, 1970."

It is the case of the Prosecution that the Respondent, whilst holding the post of Deputy President of MPS, approved a trading licence for the business of selling 4-Digit Lottery to Syarikat Nasip which at the material time he knew it was owned by his brother, Leong Tsen Hin @ Robert. By such an act the Prosecution said that the Respondent committed corrupt practice as he used his public office to his own advantage.

From the evidence so far adduced the followings have evolved:

(i) that at the material time, July 1992, the Respondent was the Deputy President of MPS;

(ii) that pursuant to a notification P.U.(B) 531/95 the Minister appointed the President and the Deputy President of MPS as the licensing authority for the area within the jurisdiction of MPS as from 01/01/1984. The notification was made on the 26/10/1995;

(iii) that whilst as Deputy President of MPS he approved a trading licence to one Syarikat Nasip in order to enable it do business of sell