Putrajaya Corporation Officer Pleads Not Guilty to 4 Corruption Charges Over Tender Award
Putrajaya Corporation officer Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman pleads not guilty to 4 corruption charges involving bribes totalling RM17,000 over tender award dealings.
Putrajaya Corporation Officer Pleads Not Guilty to 4 Corruption Charges Over Tender Award
A senior Putrajaya Corporation official has entered not-guilty pleas on four counts of soliciting and receiving bribes linked to a tender award involving three companies, with the Sessions Court setting bail at RM20,000 and scheduling 16 hearing days beginning November 7.
SEO Title: Putrajaya Corporation Corruption Charges | Officer Faces 4 Counts, KL Court
Deck: Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman, a principal assistant director at Putrajaya Corporation, faced four corruption charges at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court in proceedings tied to tender dealings between December 2015 and May 2016, with alleged gratification totalling RM17,000 across two named individuals and three named companies.
A Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court became the setting on the day of mention for four separate corruption charges laid against a senior officer of Putrajaya Corporation, the statutory body responsible for administering Malaysia’s federal administrative capital. The case centres on allegations of soliciting and receiving bribes in connection with a tender award — a matter now before the Malaysian court system following an investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). The accused, Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman, serves as a principal assistant director in Putrajaya Corporation’s Corporate Services Department, and he claimed trial to all four charges when they were read before him. The prosecution is represented by the MACC, with Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Firdaus Abu Hanipah appearing in court, while the accused is represented by counsel Mohamad Dhiyaulhaq Mohamed Arifin.
Four Counts Are Read, And The Accused Enters Not-Guilty Pleas Across All
The four charges against Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman arise from alleged conduct spanning roughly five months, beginning with a specific incident on the afternoon of December 16, 2015. On the first charge, he is accused of soliciting RM17,000 from a person named Noor Alfidah Mohamed Zakri, with the alleged gratification intended as consideration for facilitating and approving a tender bid on behalf of three companies: Syarikat Teras Reka, Syarikat Shogi Bena Sdn Bhd, and Syarikat Fidah Supply & Services.
This is not a routine administrative dispute. The charge sheet places the alleged solicitation at a specific, named location — Restoran Nasi Kandar Darulsalam, Unit 13, Jalan 4W, Galeria PJH, Presint 3, Putrajaya — at 4pm on December 16, 2015, lending the first charge a level of specificity that the MACC typically deploys when physical surveillance or witness testimony underpins the allegation.
The remaining three charges shift from solicitation to receipt. On those counts, Mohamad Rohaizat is accused of corruptly receiving sums from Noor Alfidah Mohamed Zakri and a second individual, Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Rahim, again for the same stated purpose of furthering the same tender bid. All three receiving offences are alleged to have occurred at the same Galeria PJH location, between December 17, 2015 and May 16, 2016 — a window of approximately five months following the initial solicitation charge.
Mohamad Rohaizat claimed trial to all four charges, signalling his intention to contest the allegations in full before the court.
From Bail Conditions To Passport Impoundment, The Court Sets A 16-Day Hearing Calendar
Sessions Court Judge Allaudeen Ismail presided over the mention and determined the conditions of release pending trial. Bail was fixed at RM20,000 with one surety — a standard condition for corruption charges of this nature under Malaysian court practice. In addition to bail, the court ordered the impoundment of the accused’s passport for the duration of the proceedings, a measure that restricts international travel and is commonly imposed in public-sector corruption cases where the accused holds a position with potential access to institutional resources.
The scale of the hearing schedule is worth noting. The case has been fixed for 16 hearing days, commencing November 7, with the next mention date set for April 30. A 16-day fixture reflects the volume of witnesses and documentary evidence the prosecution is likely to present, consistent with the MACC’s approach in tender-related corruption cases where financial transaction records, procurement documentation, and multiple witness accounts typically form the evidential backbone.
The involvement of two alleged bribe-givers — Noor Alfidah Mohamed Zakri and Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Rahim — and three named companies suggests the prosecution intends to establish a pattern of conduct rather than a single isolated transaction, which would explain the multi-day hearing allocation.
Behind The RM17,000 Figure Is A Question Of Institutional Integrity In Federal Procurement
The real story here is not the sum alleged, but the position from which the conduct is said to have originated. Putrajaya Corporation is not a peripheral body. As the authority responsible for the planning, development, and management of Putrajaya, Malaysia’s purpose-built federal administrative capital, it administers public contracts and tender processes that carry significant public interest weight. An allegation that a principal assistant director in its Corporate Services Department — a role with direct proximity to corporate procurement decisions — solicited and received bribes in connection with a tender award touches on the integrity of public contracting at the federal level.
The MACC’s decision to charge Mohamad Rohaizat on four distinct counts, rather than consolidating the alleged conduct into a single charge, signals an intention to address both the act of solicitation and the repeated act of receipt as separately prosecutable offences under Malaysian anti-corruption law. This structural approach to the charge sheet is consistent with Section 16 and Section 17 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009, which treats solicitation and receipt as distinct offences.
The three companies named in the charges — Syarikat Teras Reka, Syarikat Shogi Bena Sdn Bhd, and Syarikat Fidah Supply & Services — have not been charged in the current proceedings as reported, and no findings have been made against them. The court case, as constituted, concerns the conduct of the Putrajaya Corporation officer as the alleged recipient and solicitor of the gratification.
Frequently Asked Questions About The Putrajaya Corporation Corruption Charges
Who is the Putrajaya Corporation officer charged with corruption? The accused is Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman, a principal assistant director attached to the Corporate Services Department of Putrajaya Corporation. He was charged at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court with four counts of soliciting and receiving bribes related to a tender award.
What are the four corruption charges against Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman? The first charge alleges that Mohamad Rohaizat solicited RM17,000 from Noor Alfidah Mohamed Zakri on December 16, 2015 as gratification for facilitating a tender bid for three named companies. The remaining three charges allege that he corruptly received sums from Noor Alfidah and Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Rahim for the same purpose, between December 17, 2015 and May 16, 2016.
Where did the alleged bribery take place? The alleged offences are said to have occurred at Restoran Nasi Kandar Darulsalam, Unit 13, Jalan 4W, Galeria PJH, Presint 3, Putrajaya. All four charges name this location.
What companies are named in the Putrajaya Corporation corruption case? Three companies are named in connection with the tender at the centre of the charges: Syarikat Teras Reka, Syarikat Shogi Bena Sdn Bhd, and Syarikat Fidah Supply & Services. These companies have not been charged in the proceedings as reported.
What bail conditions did the Sessions Court impose? Judge Allaudeen Ismail set bail at RM20,000 with one surety. The court also ordered the impoundment of Mohamad Rohaizat’s passport pending the disposal of the case.
When is the trial scheduled to begin, and how long will it run? The case has been fixed for hearing over 16 days, beginning November 7. The next mention date is April 30.
Which agency is prosecuting the case, and who are the lawyers involved? The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is the prosecuting authority. Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Firdaus Abu Hanipah appeared for the MACC. The accused is represented by counsel Mohamad Dhiyaulhaq Mohamed Arifin.
A Public Institution’s Procurement Process Now Faces Scrutiny In Open Court
The charges against Mohamad Rohaizat Kasman mark the opening of a court process that will examine, over 16 scheduled hearing days, whether a senior Putrajaya Corporation officer used his position in the Corporate Services Department to solicit and receive RM17,000 in alleged bribes tied to a tender award for three companies. The accused has claimed trial to all four charges and is presumed innocent until the court delivers its findings. The MACC prosecution and defence counsel have both entered appearances, and the case proceeds to full hearing from November 7.
For more information on the Putrajaya Corporation corruption charges, members of the public and media may refer to:
- Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC): www.sprm.gov.my
- Putrajaya Corporation: www.pjhcorp.com.my
- Kuala Lumpur Courts Complex: Jalan Duta, 50480 Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan
- MACC Public Complaints & Information: +603-8870 0000
- MACC Official Social Media: Facebook — @SPRMofficial | Twitter/X — @SPRMofficial
This report is based on court proceedings and publicly available charge details as reported. All individuals named are presumed innocent unless and until found guilty by a court of law.
