PRESS STATEMENT :- 30th Nov 2010
Chairman – Social Care Foundation
The objective of this article is to enhance the Public, the significant roles between MACC and the A-G’s Office.Malaysians have every right to judge and criticise the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)‘s performance but that must be done fairly. But they cannot blame or hold the MACC responsible for failing to decide on prosecution matters because that is the power and the jurisdiction of the Attorney-General (A-G)’s Chambers.
Furthermore, if there is lack of evidence, then the A-G must not try to bulldoze its way and order a case to be prosecuted because when a case is lost in court, the public is always quick to blame the MACC, not the A-G. Of late, the MACC has been severely criticised over its handling of serveral high profile cases, including accusations that its performance is not up to the mark.
Among the cases in focus unfortunately and inevitably that MACC has been accused of selective prosecution are:
a) The failure to prosecute former Selangor Mentri Besar Dato‘ Seri Dr Khir Toyo for allegedly amassing unusual wealth in his ownership of a mansion purportedly valued at RM24 million whereas several Pakatan Rakyat Selangor state assemblymen were subjected intense investigations over an alleged abuse of allocation amounting to only RM2,400 (the Teoh Beng Hock case);
b) The prosecution of Dato‘ Mirza Thaiyab, the Director-General of Tourism, whereas the ministers responsible for the project are not held accountable. This was after Dato‘ Mirza had been acquitted in an earlier case for gratification of a dental treatment;
c) The prosecution of only certain people in the multi-billion-ringgit Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal whereas the forensic audit report by Price-Waterhouse Coopers had named many other personalities;
d) Till today, there is no decision to act against former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, after former Kuala Lumpur CID chief Dato’ Mat Zain Ibrahim, published letters accusing these two officials of manipulating and tampering with evidence in the “Anwar Black Eye Incident”.
1. Another case that has caught public attention involves lawyer En Rosli Dahlan. The alternative media has created the perception that Rosli has been victimised as a result of his professional role in pursuing civil and criminal actions against former Malaysia Airlines chairman Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli.
2. In my capacity, not only as Social Care Foundation chairman but also as a member of the MACC Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel, I have to date received two letters from Rosli, essentially seeking MACC to withdraw the charge that MACC had preferred against him. I produce herewith the two letters.
3. Upon receipt of Rosli’s letters, I have made enquiries with the MACC, and was informed MACC had recommended to A-G that the MACC would like the case to be withdrawn. However, till today the A-G has not responded.
4. It is incumbent on me as Social Care Foundation chairman and a member of the Panel Advisory of MACC to present facts which would accurately explain MACC’s position so that the public can fully appreciate MACC’s role and area of jurisdiction and will no longer view the MACC with suspicion.
5. I hope the public will understand that in matters relating to prosecution of an offence, Art. 145(3) of the Federal Constitution vests the A-G with discretion to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings. As such, the MACC does not have the power to withdraw the charge against Rosli unless the A-G agrees to do so.
6. In this regard, I am disturbed by the disclosure made in a blog, Malaysia Today, alleging that A-G Gani is consorting with a person who is allegedly the proxy of Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli, namely, En Shahidan Shafie. That blog had produced records and pictures purportedly from Tabung Haji that A-G Gani and Shahidan are currently performing the Haj‘ together. This is a very serious allegation which adds a different dimension to the allegations of selective prosecution that I have outlined above.
7. I call upon the A-G Gani to deny this allegation and to also explain the true facts in order to allay any negative public perception surrounding this matter. This is necessary to dispel the allegations made by Mat Zain in his public letters which accused the MACC as follows:
“It only shows that MACC and the Chambers are prepared even to go to the extent of affirming false affidavit to screen Gani Patail from legal punishment.”
8. According to Y.B. Dato‘ Seri Nazri, the Cabinet will investigate the allegations against A-G Tan Sri Gani Patail and I pray this must be conducted transparently without any further delay.
9. I take the liberty to appeal to all media that when MACC has a success rate in convictions, please also highlight in the manner in which you have highlighted the failure of MACC. Be fair to the Rakyat as well as MACC.