Tan Sri Shahrir Abdul Samad told the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today that his lawsuit was not intended as an act of revenge, but to ensure that enforcement powers are exercised appropriately. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon
First Published: Wednesday, 19 Aug 2026 8:21 PM MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 19 — Former Johor Bahru Member of Parliament Tan Sri Shahrir Abdul Samad told the High Court here today that his lawsuit was not intended as an act of revenge, but to ensure that enforcement powers are exercised appropriately.
He said this when testifying in the lawsuit he filed against former Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Tommy Thomas, former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Latheefa Koya, the MACC, and the government regarding malicious prosecution.
“It is not for revenge. I initiated the action because the powers to investigate, seize, arrest and prosecute are immense.
“Those powers must be exercised only after the fundamental aspects have been properly investigated,” said Shahrir, 76, in his witness statement.
The former Felda chairman said that anyone, including himself, could be investigated if there were valid grounds.
“I never claimed to be immune from investigation. However, in my view, an investigation must be thorough and fair before a person is arrested and charged with a serious offence,” he said when testifying in the lawsuit he filed against former Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Tommy Thomas, former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Latheefa Koya, the MACC, and the government regarding malicious prosecution.
Shahrir was charged in the Sessions Court here in January 2020 with failing to declare the RM1 million he received from former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to the Inland Revenue Board (LHDN). The case was subsequently transferred to the High Court for trial.
On January 5, 2023, the High Court acquitted Shahrir of the charge after the prosecution indicated that it did not intend to proceed with the case.
According to Shahrir, the prosecution’s decision followed testimony by MACC investigating officer Nurzahidah Yacop that she had not investigated whether the RM1 million was a reimbursement or income.
“The charge against me hinged on the allegation that the RM1 million was income I failed to declare. If it had not yet been determined whether it was income or a reimbursement, the fundamental basis of the charge remained unresolved, yet I was dragged to court,” he said.
Shahrir maintained that the RM1 million was not income but a reimbursement from Najib.
He said that in late 2013, he arranged a meeting with Najib, who was also Umno president at the time, to discuss issues concerning the restoration of Puri Langkasuka and seek reimbursement for personal savings he had advanced to cover the project’s repair costs and further restoration work.
“I explained the problems facing the project, the hardship endured by the buyers, the efforts undertaken and the personal savings I had spent to cover the restoration project.
“After hearing about the efforts made, Datuk Seri Najib sympathised with me and gave me a cheque for RM1 million. I understood the cheque to be a reimbursement for a portion of the personal funds I had advanced for Puri Langkasuka,” he said.
The trial before Judge Gan Techiong continues on September 4.
Shahrir is represented by lawyers Datuk Firoz Hussein Ahmad Jamaluddin and Datuk Syed Faisal Al-Edros Syed Abdullah Al-Edros, while Thomas is represented by lawyers Alan Adrian Gomez and Haikaldin Mahyiddin.
The three other defendants are represented by Senior Federal Counsel (SFC) Liew Horng Bin and Zureen Elina Mohd Dom. — Bernama