Lawyer urges RCI to take action against Puad

Dr Mahathir Mohamad's lawyer will attempt to compel the secretary of the ongoing Forex Royal Commission of Inquiry to lodge a police report against Special Affairs Department (Jasa) director-general Mohd Puad Zarkashi.

Lawyer Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla said Puad's statement yesterday had violated the dignity, sanctity and standing of the RCI which comprises members appointed by the Agong.

He also concurred with former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram that this amounts to a violation of Section 12 (2) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1950.

In a statement released by Jasa, Puad alluded that former Bank Negara adviser Nor Mohamed Yakcop had allegedly avoided implicating then prime minister Mahathir and finance minister Anwar Ibrahim when he testified at the RCI on Wednesday.

Puad also asked if Nor Mohamed was trying to show gratitude to Mahathir for bringing him back by appointing him as a special economic adviser during the Asian financial crisis of 1997.

Contradicts other testimonies

Haniff said what Puad did was an insult to the RCI because if the latter possessed relevant evidence, he should have come forward and volunteered his testimony instead of issuing press statements.

"It is wrong and rude for Puad to make such comments when he was not part of the RCI," he said.

On Puad's insinuations regarding Mahathir and Anwar, Haniff argued that Puad has clearly not followed the RCI proceedings, where more than 20 witnesses, including former Bank Negara staff, has clearly established that the central bank enjoyed autonomy from the executive.

"Why is Puad jumping the gun to suggest the then PM or finance minister (might be involved). It is wrong to jump the gun as Nor has other senior officers when he was in Bank Negara, namely the deputy governor or governor.

"This is clear from Nor's statement and the statements of other witnesses. Nor's statement has been published in full by some portals but Puad chose certain parts (of it) but ignore others.

"It is very misleading for Puad to suggest this without reading Nor's statement in full where the witness statement was not challenged by the panel or the conducting officer," said Haniff.

An admission of guilt?

Haniff said Puad's diatribe had inadvertently suggested that the Najib administration does not allow statutory bodies to operate independently.

"Is this an admission of guilt? Is he (Puad) admitting this is how the Najib government operates by giving directives to all authorities and interferes (with the daily affairs)?" he asked.

Haniff urged Puad to apologise to the RCI, Nor, Mahathir and Anwar for making the statement which contradicts the testimonies made to the RCI so far.

"If Puad has evidence to suggest otherwise, he should be brave enough to be a witness," he said.

According to Section 12 (2) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1950, any person who "threatens, insults or injures any person for having given evidence, or on account of the evidence which he has given before the commissioners, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years". - Mkini