To trust or not to trust the MACC

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is internationally recognised for its reputation in fighting graft in Malaysia. Its bosses too are highly-ranked for their credibility in leading the much-afraid commission.

I have developed a good contact and rapport with some of its senior officials, especially after my blog post in February 2011 exposed a scandal at the MCMC.

Apart from that, the relation goes too mutual.

However, 17 months after giving my statements and proof to the MCMC and MACC, the case seems to lead to nowhere although a superintendent with the MACC confirmed that the commission had tangible evidence to file a case against the 'special officer' to the minister.

Even few officers at the MCMC confirmed that the special officer - who months later was conferred a datukship (for making quick bucks out of the laptop contract?) - got a good hand from the top people at a ministry and the commission.

I was delighted with the outcome of the initial investigation.

The MACC superintendent did his job quite well in collecting evidence and related documents which would implicate the guy in court.

Then, towards the year end, there was a lull.

When I called up the superintendent a few times, he said he was in Sabah, all the time in Sabah. And each time I asked about the case, he refused to feed me with details. Instead, he gave me the name of another officer whom I should liaise with in Putrajaya.

But that officer too refused comments. The only thing he said was 'dont worry, we have enough proof and we will prosecute him soon'.

After that, nothing happened. In fact, the officer refused to see me while the superintendent said he was still in Sabah. Was he transferred to Sabah for his investigative role in the case? He has also deleted my name and phone number from his list because when I SMSed him last nite, he replied 'I am in Sabah, and who is this?'

Nope! I don't blame him but I am taking the MACC to task for neglecting the case. I believe some big guns have applied pressure on the MACC to put the case to 'rest'.

Or was there a cover-up?

So, how am I suppose to trust the integrity of the MACC if the top people cannot touch politicians and the 'big fish'? O-oh, maybe they are too busy nabbing the small fish for the sake of fulfilling their responsibility in fighting corruption!

Until the MACC explains what actually happened to the case, I will continue my pursuit for an answer...a logic one, of course!