THE Kota Kinabalu Sessions Court today has struck out businessman Datuk Albert Tei’s ex-parte request for leave to commence committal proceedings against caretaker Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor, ruling that the application was fundamentally flawed.
Judge Zaini Fishir @ Fisal dismissed the bid on Wednesday after hearing arguments from Edward Paul for Tei and submissions by Sabah State Attorney-General Datuk Brenndon Keith Soh with Roland Alik on behalf of Hajiji.
Tei had sought leave under Order 52, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court 2012 to bring contempt proceedings, alleging that state immigration powers were misused to bar his entry and thus prevent him from attending his own corruption trial.
Brenndon, in a statement released the same day, explained: “On 17.11.2025, we obtained permission from the Sessions Court to appear and assist the judge in determining whether to grant permission for Albert Tei’s Application.
“At the same time, the Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP), Tuan Rustam Sanip was also invited to address the court on the application in support of the SAG’s submission.”
He said the State Attorney-General’s Chambers mounted a preliminary objection on the basis that Tei’s legal footing was fundamentally unsound.
“In opposing the application based on a preliminary objection, we had submitted that O52 ROC 2012 only governs civil proceedings and not criminal matters based on Order 1 Rule 2 (2) of the ROC 2012.
Therefore, the application was unsustainable because Albert Tei’s reliance on O52 ROC 2012 was misconceived and bad in law.”
Brenndon further stressed that prosecutorial authority lies exclusively with the Federal Attorney General.
“Furthermore, under Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution and section 376 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is the Federal Attorney General represented by the DPP who has the ‘control and direction of all criminal prosecutions and proceedings’.
Therefore, Albert Tei as an accused person in the criminal proceedings before another court is not the proper applicant to commence contempt proceedings in a different court, as that role belongs to the DPP in the criminal proceedings.
In addition, it was further submitted that the application was made in bad faith and was an abuse of the court’s process, wholly devoid of any factual or legal basis,” he noted.
After considering the arguments, Judge Zaini upheld the preliminary objection and rejected Tei’s application in its entirety.
According to Brenndon, the ruling underscores the judiciary’s firm stance that contempt powers must not be misapplied.
He said the outcome “reflects the court’s clear affirmation that the contempt jurisdiction must not be invoked lightly or used for purposes unrelated to the proper administration of justice.” - November 26, 2025
