KUALA LUMPUR, April 10 — The Malaysian Bar is seeking a judicial review to quash the attorney-general’s (AG) decision not to continue criminal proceedings against Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

News portal Free Malaysia Today reported the statutory body of some 25,000 lawyers in the peninsula issued a scathing statement criticising the AG’s issuance of a notice of discontinuance in the long-running corruption case, describing it as irrational, unreasonable and not in the public interest.

According to the news report, the Bar is asking the court to declare the AG’s decision null and void on grounds that it allegedly exceeds the powers prescribed under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution and Section 254(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).

The Bar is also seeking a mandamus order compelling the AG to resume prosecution or reinstate charges against Zahid under Section 254A of the CPC.

It is also requesting disclosure of all documents, reasons and materials relied upon by the AG in making the decision.

The application was filed at the High Court here by the legal firm Abhilaash Subramaniam & Co, naming the AG and Zahid as respondents.

According to the news report, the Bar asserted that the discontinuance contradicts the High Court’s earlier finding that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against Zahid.

It also said the move amounted to a waste of judicial resources and public funds, given the advanced stage of proceedings when the case was halted.

The affidavit for the judicial review bid was reportedly affirmed by Bar president B. Anand Raj.

Zahid had previously been granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) in September 2023 on 47 corruption, money laundering and criminal breach of trust charges, pending further investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

The High Court had earlier ruled that the prosecution had established a prima facie case, with the trial already at the defence stage when the DNAA was granted.

The Bar’s latest move comes after earlier attempts to challenge the DNAA decision were dismissed, with appeals now proceeding at the Court of Appeal.