Don't compare Zahid's corruption case with Muhyiddin - Dr Afif

MUAR - The corruption case of Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who was “discharged not amounting to an acquittal” (DNAA) by the court on Monday, should not be compared to the four cases of Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who was acquitted on Aug 14.

Taman Medan State Assemblyman Dr Afif Bahardin said that the cases of the Umno President and Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) President were completely different.

He added that some parties are trying to create confusion by comparing the outcomes of both cases.

"What sets apart Zahid Hamidi's case from Muhyiddin's case?

"Zahid Hamidi's case had enough evidence to proceed, known as prima facie evidence.

"Dozens of witnesses were called, and what Zahid's lawyers needed to do was present evidence that he did not commit the alleged offenses.

"The key difference is that he was released because the public prosecutor or the government chose not to continue with the case.

"The judge expressed disappointment and stated that it was a waste of time and money for the public," he explained.

Dr Afif made these comments during the Perikatan Nasional (PN) ceramah at the Haji Abdullah Selatan Voting District Unit (UDM) 5, held at the Ar-Raihan Islamic Building Nursery Center in Bakri yesterday.

Zahid was discharged without acquittal by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Monday on 47 charges of corruption, breach of trust, and money laundering involving funds from Yayasan Akalbudi.

Dr Afif went on to mention that the DAP known for its stance against corruption, issued a statement on Monday.

However, instead of disputing the verdict, they called for an explanation from the Attorney General.

Dr Afif viewed this as an injustice and an abuse of power, stressing that it was not the fault of the court.