SO WHO IS THE MACC DATUK SERI WHO HAD SEX IN THE OFFICE?

So tell me, Rohaizad, was Teoh Beng Hock driven to suicide due to the sleep depravation torture and the verbal abuse he was subjected to or was he thrown out the window like Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed because he refused to confess to the crimes that the MACC said he had committed? Can we be transparent about all this and address the moral issues that you so fondly talk about?

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

“The Commission would like to stress that public confidence and support towards the MACC had increased due to various initiatives and actions implemented by the MACC since 2009, long before the investigation on the Prime Minister.”

“The MACC also stresses that MACC is not ‘out to get the Prime Minister’ as claimed by Raja Petra Kamarudin to boost the credibility and increase the public confidence. MACC is not depending on this case to increase its public confidence.”

“Thus, MACC has the duty and the moral responsibility to carry a comprehensive investigation. As we mentioned and stressed earlier, the MACC as an independent Commission will carry out its investigation on each and every case in a transparent and professional manner.”

“The MACC’s numerous achievements and successes in the last few years is formidable proof that the Commission is heading in the right direction. This is also achieved through the guidance from the five independent oversight bodies formed under the MACC Act 2009.”

*****************************************

That was what MACC’s communications director, Rohaizad Yaakob, said, and added that the public confidence level for the MACC increased from 31% in 2009 to 68% in 2014.

So, in the eyes of Rohaizad Yaakob, MACC is a success because the public confidence level in the agency has more than doubled. And as long as the public perception is positive then success has been achieved. Well, the German public, too, had a positive perception of Adolf Hitler so I suppose that makes him the most successful German leader in history since success is measured in terms of public perception.

There were many issues that Malaysia Today raised in that article which MACC replied to but they responded to only one of those many issues. Why did they not reply to all those others? Perception is subjective, which means it is intangible. So why only talk about something intangible and avoid discussing the more tangible issues, which would require facts?

It is like arguing with religionists. When you start bringing out facts, they end the discussion by saying that religion is about faith and not about facts so either you believe or you do not believe. Facts have nothing to do with belief. Yes, even a debate on God is based on perception and what you believe is based on that perception while facts have nothing to do with it.

But I am not going to allow MACC to get away with this. They are talking about a survey and how that survey proved that MACC’s public confidence level has increased from just 31% to almost 70%. Who did that survey? When was it done? How was the sampling done? What were the questions that were asked? How did the respondents respond to the questions?

For example, I can ask, “In the past, MACC’s image was very bad but now it is not very bad but just a little bit bad. Do you agree?” And the respondent will reply, “Yes.”

Another question. “MACC has been accused of going after only the small fish but now we are going after the biggest fish in Malaysia, the Prime Minister. Do you think MACC is doing a great job at trying to get the Prime Minister?” And the respondent will reply, “Yes.”

So you see, you can tailor the questions in such a way that 70% of those specially chosen respondents will say ‘yes’ and then that ‘yes’ can be taken as the public now has more confidence in the MACC.

Rohaizad said, “Thus, MACC has the duty and the moral responsibility to carry a comprehensive investigation. As we mentioned and stressed earlier, the MACC as an independent Commission will carry out its investigation on each and every case in a transparent and professional manner.”

Okay, so we are now talking about moral responsibility and doing things in a transparent and professional manner. So let us talk about that.

MACC suspected one very senior man, a Datuk Seri, of being a crook. So they bugged his room with a hidden camera (like they did with ex-Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim) to try to obtain evidence against him.

Now, this is a very senior man and he was under suspicion. They suspected him enough to hide a video camera in his room so that they can catch him red-handed and have the evidence against him on camera. But what they captured on camera instead is the Datuk Seri having sex with one of this staff, a married woman — married to another man, of course.

Many people saw this video so it is not a secret in the MACC. In fact, the ex-Deputy Director of the Special Branch also saw this video. Do you remember this ex-Deputy Director of the Special Branch? He was the man who challenged ex-Attorney General Gani Patail to reveal the truth regarding Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and suggested that Gani is scared of revealing the truth because he (Gani), too, has skeletons in the closet.

So Gani Patail has skeletons in the closet, is it? Well, this is what the ex-Deputy Director of the Special Branch says. Did the MACC investigate this allegation? And I heard Gani was so upset that he called this ex-Deputy Director of the Special Branch and fooked him good and proper. That is why he never talks about that matter anymore.

What action has been taken against this MACC Datuk Seri who bonked someone else’s wife in his office? Rohaizad talks about moral responsibility. Should there not be a moral responsibility to take action against a very senior man in the MACC who bonks someone else’s wife in his office, who also happens to be a staff member of the MACC?

And we have not even started talking about the report that said the MACC staff members spend their time watching porn in the office. Is that why the MACC people are so horny and are bonking each other in the office?

What happened to the Eric Chia case? Perwaja was robbed of billions of Ringgit. How come Eric Chia escaped jail? Well, Eric Chia escaped due to a mere technicality, a ‘mistake’ they made in obtaining crucial evidence against Eric Chia which could not be used in court due to this ‘mistake’.

Yes, I know how people can escape the death sentence due to ‘mistakes’ like stating ‘Jalan Tengku Abdul Rahman’ instead of ‘Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman’ on the charge sheet. That small technicality can help you escape the gallows, of course for a certain exorbitant fee like RM5 million or RM10 million.

And I know of lawyers in town who can help you with this. In fact, some lawyers make a living doing this kind of thing.

And then we have the Ling Liong Sik case. He, too, was accused of robbing PKFZ by lying to the Cabinet. But then Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad testified in court that Ling did not lie and that the Cabinet knew what Ling was doing. So Ling was spared a long time in jail because the Cabinet was behind his actions and was aware of his actions.

Well, in June this year, 1MDB also presented its rationalisation and debt reduction plans to the Cabinet. The Cabinet was briefed about what was happening in 1MDB and what they planned to do up to the end of the year.

After listening to all this, the Cabinet approved 1MDB’s plans. But still they want to go after 1MDB even after the Cabinet has approved and endorsed 1MDB’s plans. In PKFZ’s case, Ling Liong Sik is innocent because the Cabinet was aware of what was going on and approved everything. In 1MDB’s case, they have committed a crime even though the Cabinet has approved all its plans and is aware of what is going on.

But, no, they are not targeting 1MDB because they want to bring down the Prime Minister. They are just doing what is morally right in the spirit of transparency and professionalism.

Okay, so let us be transparent and professional then. Why does MACC’s chief commissioner, Abu Kassim Mohamed, refuse to testify in the case that lawyer Rosli Dahlan brought against the MACC? The court has said that Rosli is innocent of a crime and that the MACC is wrong in persecuting him (yes, persecuting, not prosecuting).

Rosli is claiming damages of RM50 million and he can most likely win that case since he already won an earlier case. So the MACC is dragging this case and does not wish to see the case settled by delaying that case as long as they can by giving excuses that Abu Kassim is too sick to go to court to testify.

If Abu Kassim is too sick to go to court to testify that would mean, just like in the case of Gani Patail, he is also too sick to continue working. So why does he not resign and go into early retirement? Why continue his employment with the MACC when he is too sick to even go to court to testify in the Rosli Dahlan case?

So do not talk about moral responsibility and about doing things in a transparent and professional manner. The MACC is opposite to all that.

Teoh Beng Hock was subjected to an interrogation from 5.00pm on the eve of his wedding day until the next day, his wedding day. That is called sleep depravation and is a form of torture. That is what they do to the Guantanamo Bay detainees — they subject them to sleep depravation.

And why interrogate Teoh Beng Hock after office hours and all through the night until the next day? Are you not supposed to conduct an interrogation between the hours of 9.00am to 5.00pm?

Let me tell you what sleep depravation torture can do to you because I, too, was subjected to that same torture back in September 2008. It drives you up the wall and it was not long before I began screaming and wailing like a baby. I became a mental wreck and the next day when the doctor came to see me I was crying non-stop. The doctor was so upset (she came to see me because she was told about my sleep depravation torture) that she lodged a complaint with the authorities.

If Teoh Beng Hock really did commit suicide, as the MACC claims, then it can only be because they drove him crazy with the sleep depravation torture and the non-stop interrogation where they shout at you, curse you, threaten you, and so on, to break you down. I, too, was banging the wall with my fists and was driven to the point of suicide when I was given that same treatment.

(I have so far never revealed this, not even to my wife, and this is the first time I am telling this story. I mean, how many people would want to admit that they want crazy while under detention and actually contemplated suicide? It sort of demonstrates a weakness so many would not want to admit this weakness.)

So tell me, Rohaizad, was Teoh Beng Hock driven to suicide due to the sleep depravation torture and the verbal abuse he was subjected to or was he thrown out the window like Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed because he refused to confess to the crimes that the MACC said he had committed? Can we be transparent about all this and address the moral issues that you so fondly talk about?