THE Federal Court has ruled that the interpretation of the word “expenditure” in the case involving Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman cannot be equated with “withdrawal of money”, as the two carry different meanings.
Justice Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali, in delivering the majority judgment, said the action by Armada’s assistant treasurer Rafiq Hakim Razali in withdrawing RM1 million from the youth wing’s account alone could not amount to criminal breach of trust.
“The party constitution is merely a set of internal rules governing a political party. Any breach of it may result in disciplinary action by the party but does not necessarily constitute a criminal offence.
“If there are two reasonable interpretations of a provision, the interpretation that favours the accused must be accepted,” he said.
The judge said the prosecution’s grounds of appeal lacked merit after reviewing the full body of evidence.
“After examining the entire evidence, the court agrees that the High Court’s conviction of Syed Saddiq on all four charges was unsafe.
“Accordingly, the prosecution’s appeal is dismissed.
“The Court of Appeal’s decision to acquit and discharge Syed Saddiq from all four charges is upheld. That is my decision,” he said.
Justice Che Mohd Ruzima and Justice Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah unanimously maintained the Court of Appeal’s decision to acquit Syed Saddiq of four charges involving alleged abetment of criminal breach of trust, misuse of property and money laundering linked to Armada’s funds six years ago.
The decision saw Syed Saddiq remaining free from the charges following a majority 2-1 ruling.
Justice Che Mohd Ruzima also found that the prosecution had failed to prove that the RM120,000 allegedly misappropriated by Syed Saddiq belonged to Armada Bumi Bersatu Enterprise or ABBE.
“The prosecution failed to prove that the RM120,000 in ABBE’s account belonged to ABBE. The 13th prosecution witness himself acknowledged that the money was collected through two fundraising events for Syed Saddiq’s election campaign in Muar.
“The investigating officer also confirmed that both fundraising programmes were intended to finance the respondent’s election campaign,” he said.
However, Court of Appeal President Datuk Seri Abu Bakar Jais, in a dissenting judgment, allowed part of the prosecution’s appeal and sought to reinstate Syed Saddiq’s conviction on three other charges.
He maintained the acquittal on the charge of abetting criminal breach of trust, saying a key element of the offence was unclear in the charge sheet.
“There was nothing in the charge explaining how the money was dishonestly misused and, more importantly, how the respondent was alleged to have abetted in that dishonest act. With respect, I am of the view that the charge did not contain sufficient information to require the respondent to answer it.
“This reason alone was sufficient to prevent the respondent from being convicted on the first charge,” he said.
However, Abu Bakar disagreed with the Court of Appeal’s assessment on the charge of dishonest misappropriation of property, saying the prosecution had successfully proven the offence.
He said the money did not belong to Syed Saddiq as it was contributed by donors through fundraising activities.
“The prosecution successfully proved that the donors were never informed that their contributions would be used to reimburse the respondent’s personal expenses which were allegedly incurred earlier.
“There was no evidence showing that the fundraising was conducted for the purpose of reimbursing the respondent’s expenses.
“Not a single donor was informed that their contributions would be used for such a purpose.
“Therefore, the offence of dishonest misappropriation of property was proven,” he said.
Abu Bakar also held the view that the two money laundering charges had likewise been proven by the prosecution. - July 13, 2026
