KUALA LUMPUR: The Sessions Court here today acquitted and discharged Datin Seri Zizie Izette Abdul Samad of all three charges of abetting in a corruption case involving RM2.8 million, linked to a RM150 million investment in Public Mutual Berhad unit trusts, dating back 11 years.
Judge Rosli Ahmad delivered the ruling after finding that the defence had successfully raised reasonable doubts at the end of the defence’s case.
Having considered the entirety of the evidence, this court finds that the accused has successfully raised a reasonable doubt in this case, while the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
“Accordingly, this court orders that the accused be acquitted and discharged of all three charges,” he said.
Zizie Izette, 47, the wife of the late former Kinabatangan Member of Parliament Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin, appeared visibly moved upon hearing the court’s decision.
Judge Rosli, in his judgment, said established legal principles clearly state that one of the elements of the abetment charge requires the prosecution to prove that the principal offence was committed before an accused can be convicted of abetment.
He said, in this case, the prosecution was required to prove that the deceased, Bung Moktar, had committed the principal offence of obtaining a bribe under Section 17(a) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act.
“However, there was a recent development in this case when the deceased passed away on Dec 5, 2025. Upon the prosecution’s application, this court ordered his discharge and acquittal in accordance with Section 254 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
“As a result of the discharge and acquittal, the deceased is deemed an innocent person because no finding of guilt was ever recorded against him. In other words, the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased had committed the offence of soliciting or obtaining a bribe,” he said.
Rosli held that the discharge and acquittal effectively removed a fundamental element required to sustain the abetment charges against Zizie Izette, namely, proof that the principal offender had committed the corruption offence.
“Applying the legal principle in this case, where the principal offender has been discharged and acquitted, the alleged abettor, who is accused of assisting the principal offender in committing the offence, likewise cannot be convicted of abetment,” he said.
Meanwhile, Rosli said Zizie Izette, in her defence, claimed she had neither knowledge of nor involvement in her late husband’s official duties as chairman of Felcra Berhad, strengthening her defence against the abetment charges.
He said Zizie Izette consistently maintained that she was unaware of, and played no role in, the deceased’s official responsibilities at Felcra.
He said the defence supported this claim through the testimonies of the accused, the deceased, and the 26th prosecution witness (PW26), former Felcra Berhad Group Chief Financial Officer Mohd Azmy Abu Samah, all of which showed that the accused was not involved in the alleged offence.
Rosli said the court found Zizie Izette’s testimony to be credible, consistent and corroborated by the evidence of other prosecution witnesses.
“This finding further strengthens the accused’s claim of innocence, as her role was merely to introduce PW24 and PW25 (Public Mutual Berhad investment agents Norhaili Ahmad Mokhtar and Madhi Abdul Hamid) to the deceased and PW26.
“The accused did not expect PW24 and PW25 to pay her an introduction fee arising from their meeting with the deceased, and the payment was made voluntarily. She did not inform the deceased that she had received the introduction fee, and the deceased himself was unaware of it.
Regarding the issue of “introduction fee”, Rosli said the defence argued that the money given to the accused by prosecution witnesses SP24 and SP25 did not amount to gratification.
However, he noted that the Sessions Court, previously presided over by Judge Rozina Ayob, had already ruled during the prosecution stage that the introduction fee was indeed a bribe.
“Based on that explanation, this court finds that the issue has already been decided by the previous Sessions Court judge. It would therefore be inappropriate for this court to reconsider the matter, as doing so would amount to reviewing the earlier decision,” he said.
Today’s proceedings were conducted by Deputy Public Prosecutors Law Chin How and Mohamad Fadhly Mohd Zamry, while Zizie Izette was represented by lawyers Datuk Seri K. Kumaraendran, Datuk M. Athimulan and Ridha Abdah Subri.
When contacted, Mohamad Fadhly said the prosecution would seek further instructions from the Attorney General on whether to file an appeal against today’s decision.
— MORE
COURT-ZIZIE IZETTE 5 KUALA LUMPUR
Zizie Izette was faced with three charges of abetting her husband in receiving cash bribes totalling RM2.8 million.
The defence closed its case after Zizie Izette completed her testimony on March 5. Bung Moktar had testified on Sept 2, 2025, after the couple failed to overturn the Court of Appeal’s decision ordering them to enter their defence.
However, on Jan 16, the Sessions Court acquitted Bung Moktar of all three charges after the prosecution decided not to proceed with the case following the former politician’s death on Dec 5, 2025.
On the first charge, Zizie Izette is accused of abetting Bung Moktar, who was then the non-executive chairman of Felcra Berhad, in obtaining a RM2.2 million cash bribe from the investment agent of Public Mutual Berhad, Madhi Abdul Hamid.
The alleged bribe was an inducement for Bung Moktar to secure the approval of the then Finance Minister II for Felcra Berhad to invest RM150 million in Public Mutual Berhad unit trust products.
— MORE
COURT-ZIZIE IZETTE 6 (LAST) KUALA LUMPUR
On the second charge, Zizie Izette was accused of abetting Bung Moktar in obtaining RM262,500 from Madhi through a Public Islamic Treasures Growth Fund (PITGF) account registered in her name for the same purpose.
She also faces a third charge of abetting her husband in obtaining RM337,500 from another Public Mutual Berhad investment agent, Norhaili Ahmad Mokhtar, through a Public Ittikal Sequel Fund (PITSEQ) account registered in her name, also in connection with the same investment.
The offences were allegedly committed at the Public Bank Berhad Taman Melawati branch on June 12 and June 19, 2015.
The charges are framed under Section 28(1)(c) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009, which provides for a maximum prison sentence of 20 years and a fine of five times the value of the gratification or RM10,000, whichever is higher, upon conviction.
— BERNAMA
