N Sivananthan said the deputy public prosecutor Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud agreed on the non-custodial sentence when Rafizi’s lawyer Ahmad Nizam Hamid proposed the punishment to the court.
“After all, it was the prosecution which charged Rafizi and the court was right not to interfere when the deputy public prosecutor had no objection on the binding over suggestion,” he said.
He said this after a three-man bench chaired by Ahmadi Asnawi handed a two-year good behaviour bond to Rafizi, who was also ordered to post RM10,000 bail in one surety.
Sivananthan said today’s decision was appropriate as Rafizi and the prosecution seemed to have agreed that the 18-month jail term imposed by the Sessions Court was excessive.
Lawyer Baljit Sidhu said this was a fit and proper case to order a non-custodial sentence.
“Rafizi today withdrew his appeal against conviction and the court was perfectly right to give Rafizi the binding over,” he said.
Baljit said during this period Rafizi must conduct himself well or else he would have to serve jail. If, for instance, he were to be found guilty of a crime, he would have to serve both that sentence and the 18 months on this sentence.
Earlier, deputy public prosecutor Awang Armadajaya told the court that he had been instructed to withdraw the appeal against Rafizi’s acquittal for being in possession of page 98 of the audit report which had been classified under the Official Secrets Act (OSA).
Nizam then informed the court that his client was withdrawing his appeal against conviction for revealing the Auditor-General’s 1MDB report in a press conference at the Parliament lobby on March 28, 2016.
The lawyer said Rafizi did it for the good of the nation and not out of self-interest. Nizam said the revelation was no threat to national security.
Awang Armadajaya responded by stating it was no longer an offence under the present circumstances.
Both offences, punishable under the OSA, carry a mandatory jail term of a minimum one year but not exceeding seven years.
Lawyer M Visvanathan, however, said today’s decision was a bad precedent as the law was very clear that an offender must serve a jail term on conviction.
He said the proceeding gave the impression that some negotiations had taken place to give Rafizi the binding over.
“Rafizi should have appealed against the conviction to get an acquittal and the deputy public prosecutor could have offered not to make any submission but let the court decide,” he said.
Rafizi given 2-year good behaviour bond for leaking 1MDB report