A three-member panel chaired by Justice Rhodzariah Bujang unanimously dismissed the appeal by Ong Chow Lee, 62, against the Court of Appeal’s decision on July 2, 2025 affirming his conviction.
“The court finds that the appellant’s appeal has no merit. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed,” Bernama reported Rhodzariah as saying.
Sitting with her were Justices Lee Swee Seng and P Ravinthran.
The Kuala Terengganu High Court sentenced Ong to 30 years in prison on July 9, 2024 after he pleaded guilty to murdering Fong Swee Fuan, 65, at a Chinese temple in Taman Raya Wakaf Tapai, Marang, between 1.20pm and 1.55pm on July 23, 2021.
Ong was also sentenced to 13 years in prison after pleading guilty to attempting to murder Fong’s nephew, Teo Hock Beng, 48, who was shot in the left arm.
Both prison sentences were to run concurrently from the date of his arrest.
Ong did not appeal against the attempted murder charge.
On July 2, 2025, the Court of Appeal dismissed Ong’s appeal against the murder conviction and sentence and confirmed the High Court’s previous decision.
During the appeal, Ong asked the court to send his case back to the High Court for a retrial, arguing that he had been influenced by his former lawyer to plead guilty, after allegedly being led to believe he would receive only 15 years’ imprisonment, although the minimum sentence for murder was 30 years.
Earlier, lawyer Ahmad Ridzuan Awang argued that there were errors of fact and law when the High Court judge accepted Ong’s guilty plea without explaining the nature and consequences of the plea.
He said the notes of the proceedings recorded that the judge carefully offered the accused a Chinese interpreter, but Ong chose to hear the two charges under Section 302 of the Penal Code for murder and Section 307 of the Penal Code for attempted murder in Malay.
“The use of Bahasa Melayu in reading the charge does not allow the court to assume that the accused has understood the charge against him and understands the nature and consequences of his guilty plea,” he said.
Deputy public prosecutor Eyu Ghim Siang argued that Ong’s guilty plea was in accordance with legal procedures, and that the appellant had said he understood the nature and consequences of the guilty plea.
“There was no reason for the court or the lawyer to deny the appellant’s right to obtain the services of an interpreter on the day of the proceedings, because the notes clearly show that a Chinese interpreter was provided and present on that day.
“The court found it clear that the appellant was questioned several times and he confirmed himself that he understood Bahasa Melayu, did not need a Chinese interpreter, and was also represented by a lawyer during the proceedings,” he said.