The conviction under Section 165 of the Penal Code was overturned, establishing that the evidence did not conclusively show the payment was intended for personal gain by the appellant.

Ahmad Nasfy Yasin JCA (Majority):

Introduction

[1] The appellant was charged before the Kuala Lumpur High Court, which charge reads as follows:

"That you, on 14 June 2016, at CIMB Bank Berhad, Pusat Bandar Damansara Branch, Level 1, Lot A4, Block A, Pusat Bandar Damansara, in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, being a public servant, Kuala Lumpur, being a public servant, to wit, the Minister for Federal Territories, accepted for yourself a valuables thing without consideration, to wit, the sum of RM2,000,000.00 from one Chai Kim Kong by way of a Hong Leong Islamic Bank cheque No 136822 belonging to Aset Kayamas Sdn Bhd that was deposited into CIMB Bank account no 8001179747 belonging to Tadmansori Holding Sdn Bhd in which you had an interest, when you knew that Aset Kayamas Sdn Bhd had a connection with your official function, and you have thereby committed and offence punishable under s 165 of the Penal Code "

[2] At the end of the trial, the appellant was found guilty and was convicted. He was sentenced to 12 months of imprisonment and a fine of RM2,000,000.00 and in default six months' imprisonment.

[3] The appellant appealed against the conviction and sentence. We heard the appeal. After carefully considering all the submissions, in writing and that made orally by both parties, we came to a decision, which is not unanimous. By a majority we allowed the appeal. Our learned brother, Abu Bakar Jais, JCA dissents and rendered his brief grounds in affirming the decision of the Court below. We have, in announcing our decision earlier rendered our broad grounds. The following are our full grounds for the majority. We will, where necessary comment on the brief grounds furnished by our learned brother, as at the time of writing these grounds, we have not the advantage of reading his full grounds. Needless to say, where we find it necessary, we will provide a response thereto, following the precedent by the majority in Federal Court in the case of R Rama Chandran v. The Industrial Court of Malaysia & Anor, 1997 MarsdenLR 1495 .

The Case In The High Court

[4] The accused in the Court below and the appellant before us, was a Minister in the Federal Cabinet. At all material time he helmed the Ministry of Federal Territories. At the same time, he was also the Secretary General of the dominant political party, UMNO (United Malays National Organisation). He was also the controlling shareholder of a company known as Tadmansori Holding Sdn Bhd (Tandmansori).

[5] In April 2013, the Ministry of Federal Territories launched a project called "Rumah Mampu Milik Wilayah Persekutuan (RUMAWIP)". It was touted as an urban affordable housing project. It targeted to build 80,000 units by 2018. To carry out this project, land will be required. It is common knowledge that the City Hall or its Malay acronym DBKL (Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur) had massive land banks, parts of which will be utilised for this project. Private companies will then be invited to submit proposals to carry out the project on the identified lands.

[6] At this juncture enter the other important persona, named in the charge as Tan Sri Chai Kim Kong. He is the director of a number of companies including a company known as Aset Kayamas Sdn Bhd From the facts, it is not in dispute that the appellant had requested Tan Sri Chai (SP19) to participate in the project. SP19 duly obliged and had through several companies that he owned including Aset Kayamas participated.

[7] It is appropriate at this juncture to state that the prosecution, in its opening statement, stated that it will adduce evidence and prove that the accused then, now the appellant, had requested for a political donation from Tan Sri Chai. We pause here to mention that it is curious that the prosecution had emphasised the words "political donation" without ascribing the extent and import of that phrase.

[8] Returning to the narrative, through a letter dated 26 January 2015, Aset Kayamas proposed to purchase DBKL's land