MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku


Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Expect AG to tell MACC there’s not enough evidence

YOURSAY | ‘I bet my bottom dollar that AG would say no evidence to charge the PM.’
Justine Gow: Well, as long as there is no name and no face, it is reasonable for the public to hold the belief that the "donor" does not exist.
Odin Tajué: Justine Gow is absolutely correct. In any case, the whole exercise is a farce.
For a start, you have a few teams investigating someone to whom they report and that someone is still in office.
Additionally, the one who holds the power to prosecute has shown himself to be totally subservient to that someone and the party the latter represents.
So even if any reports submitted by the so-called investigating teams contain incriminating evidence, prosecution is not going to happen — unless, of course, a miracle happens and the prosecutor recovers his senses sufficient to prod him to do the proper thing.
And it is futile to expect the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to divulge any pertinent detail. The former attorney-general Abu Talib Othman said on Boxing Day that the MACC cannot reveal to the public the outcome of its investigations, nor can it disclose its recommendations to the prosecutor, as they are confidential matters.
Even if the MACC and the rest of the teams are permitted to make any disclosure, they wouldn't have the guts to do it — obviously for fear of ending up sleeping in a concrete-filled barrel.
There was an example just recently. Bank Negara fined AmBank RM53.7 million, but there was no disclosure with regard to the party that committed the offence and which was facilitated by AmBank.
And if the MACC's report contains incriminating evidence, the present AG is highly unlikely to want to reveal any detail, either. We all know his stance.
On the other hand, if the present AG does make any statement, he is likely to say that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone. And what can you do about it? Nothing.
There is no donor, full-stop. Not in the sense of the correct meaning of the word. The word that would aptly describe the person(s) is conduit(s) or something similar.
If you have something grave to hide, you would not want to identify the conduit(s), for the obvious reason that the information will lead your enquirer to the nature of what is hidden.
Grey Matter: If MACC is not allowed to disclose any details of the investigations until its brought to court, then why did MACC make a statement a few months earlier that the RM2.6 billion was a donation?
The fact that MACC declared it was a donation even before the investigation had been completely speaks volumes of MACC's credibility.
Secondly, under the law that MACC so relies upon, isn't a donation gratification and hence it is corruption?
If the PM is not charged on that basis alone then every person can claim that monies received by him are donations and even saying it’s not for personal use.
What kind of law we have when we cannot apply it fairly against all corrupt practices without fear or favour?
I bet my bottom dollar that AG would say no evidence to charge the PM and case closed even if in an unlikely situation that MACC recommends PM to be charged.
Iiiizzzziiii: It looks like MACC could be following the footsteps of Dewan Negara where its sole function is to rubber stamp whatever policy enacted by the government.
MACC has already conveyed its finding to the public by stating that the money ended up in PM’s private account is a donation and the source is from the Middle East.
If you read between the lines, what is the purpose of its investigation then?
Red Baron: So MACC completes its report and sends to the AG with its recommendations and it is up to AG whether to prosecute?
It is like the case involving Bank Negara, which sent its report to AG with recommendations to prosecute but AG said there was not enough evidence to do so.
I believe it will be the same case and that all the efforts of MACC will just go down the drain and their investigation report will be classified top secret and not released to the public.
Wg321: I am not surprised if MACC changed its story by saying that there is more than one donor as claimed by a certain minister.
All this delay shows that MACC is more interested in protecting PM Najib Razak than telling the truth.
Saya Pun Nak Cari Makan: The public is tired of these nonsensical tales. When it comes to investigation into allegations against those in power, and in this case Najib, there is no end to prevent disclosure of important evidence.
Anyway, there are so many allegations against him, and it would be highly ridiculous that he is innocent of all of them.
Just a reminder, the people do not live in caves nowadays. Do not take the public for a ride too often.
Anonymous #96844426: At the end of the day, the AG has the power to prosecute or not to prosecute. We all know what will happen next. -Mkini

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.