Dec 14 decision on whether Peter Anthony to enter defence in false document case

KUALA LUMPUR: The Sessions Court here fixed Dec 14 to decide whether to call former Sabah Infrastructure Development Minister, Datuk Peter Anthony, to enter his defence or acquit him for using false documents relating to a system maintenance contract seven years ago.

Judge Azura Alwi set the date after hearing submissions from deputy public prosecutor, Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, and lawyer Munawar Kabir Mohd Zainal Abidin, who represented Peter, at the end of the prosecution case.

Peter, 50, was charged with falsifying a document, namely, a letter from the office of the deputy vice-chancellor of Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), dated June 9, 2014, by inserting a false statement in the title of the letter with the intention that it be used for the purpose of cheating the Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister at the Federal Government Administrative Centre, Putrajaya, between June 13 and Aug 21, 2014.

He also faces an alternative charge of using a false document as genuine, namely a letter from the office of the deputy vice-chancellor of UMS dated June 9, 2014, which had a false statement in the title of the letter, and he had reason to believe that the document was false, at the same place and time.

Earlier, Wan Shaharuddin argued that Peter falsified the document because he typed the title of the letter based on the testimony of the third witness, Mohd Shukur Mohd Din, that he left a blank draft of the supporting letter with only a letterhead in the computer in the accused's office, but found it filled with dates, title and content the next day.

"Peter, as the owner of Syarikat Asli Jati, had tried to use Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's cable to 'hijack' the project, which the accused knew the project was made through an open tender," he said, adding that this was a dirty tactic which saw the accused deceive Najib, who at that time was the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.

Munawar Kabir, on the other hand, argued that there was no evidence to show that Peter had committed the offences as stated in the charge.

He said that the draft letter of support allegedly prepared at Peter's office could not be proven to be authentic, as the prosecution did not submit forensic analytical evidence to connect the accused to the charges.

He added that the prosecution also failed to prove that the computer allegedly used to prepare the draft letter of support belonged to Peter, as it was not confiscated by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

Munawar Kabir, who informed the court that the defence would call eight witnesses if Peter was ordered to enter his defence, said that Mohd Shukur lied when he stated that the draft letter of support was prepared at the accused's office; instead it was prepared by the witness himself.

-- BERNAMA