THE COURT of Appeal was told today that none of the funds raised by the youth wing of a political party in 2018 were used to support Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman’s campaign during Malaysia’s 14th General Election (GE14), despite claims they were intended for that purpose.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Farah Ezlin Yusop Khan argued that the Muar MP had allegedly altered the original purpose of the funds by transferring RM100,000 into his personal Amanah Saham Bumiputera (ASB) investment account after securing victory in GE14.
“There was no indication of any withdrawals that could reasonably be interpreted as campaign expenses. On the day the appellant requested the funds, there were no disbursements at all,” she said.
“When the campaign ended and the appellant had won the election, the money was instead channelled into his ASB account,” she told the three-judge panel led by Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim on the third day of the appeal hearing against Syed Saddiq’s conviction and sentence for criminal breach of trust, misappropriation of property, and money laundering.
According to the prosecution, the appellant had instructed former Assistant Treasurer of the party’s youth wing, Armada, Rafiq Hakim Razali, to transfer RM120,000 from the Armada Bumi Bersatu Enterprise (ABBE) account into his personal account in three separate transactions dated 8, 11 and 21 April 2018 — all before the official start of the election campaign on 28 April.
“The appellant directed the transfer of funds from the ABBE account into his personal Maybank account. Everyone in Armada knew these were contributions intended for the election campaign,” Farah Ezlin explained.
“What transpired was a change in intention — the money remained untouched during the entire campaign period and was only dealt with later, between 16 and 19 June 2018,” she added.
The court was further informed that the RM120,000 was never utilised for its stated purpose. Instead, after the election, Syed Saddiq allegedly made two separate transactions of RM50,000 each into his ASB investment account.
“This was an excessive act by the appellant — he took money meant for campaigning and diverted it for investment,” said Farah Ezlin.
The appeal hearing continues, with the defence set to present its submissions. – April 17, 2025
.jpg)
.jpg)
