Wan Saiful unable to meet MACC, defends MP immunity

 

Bersatu leader Wan Saiful Wan Jan was unable to present himself at MACC headquarters after being told that the date he had set was unsuitable.

This comes after the Tasik Gelugor MP defended lawmakers’ absolute immunity from being subjected to civil proceedings for matters raised in the Dewan Rakyat.

Wan Saiful’s lawyer Chetan Jethwani informed MACC that the opposition MP would be unable to attend the session to record his statement due to the unsuitable date through a letter dated yesterday (March 14).

“In the letter, our client asserted his parliamentary privilege and invited MACC to reconsider its position considering the privilege granted to MPs under the law.

“This evening, at 4.55pm, MACC responded in writing with their explanation when replying to our letter. My client is currently reviewing the matter and we will respond accordingly.

“Our client has always expressed his willingness to cooperate with MACC, provided that MACC acts within the limits of the law,” Jethwani told Malaysiakini.

His team had sent the letter as a reply to MACC over its notice under Section 30(1)(a) of the MACC Act 2009, he said.

Section 30(1)(a) of the MACC Act allows the anti-graft body to order any person before its commissioner for the purpose of verbal examination in relation to any matter which may assist an investigation into an offence under the Act.

Yesterday, Wan Saiful alleged harassment by the MACC, which was seeking to record his statement over his speech in the Dewan Rakyat.

On Feb 28, Wan Saiful claimed in Parliament that he was offered a RM1.7 million allocation for his constituency in return for supporting Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

Following this, MACC chief Azam Baki asserted that anyone alleging a bribe offer bears the responsibility to report immediately for further action.

Meanwhile, Jethwani said that Wan Saiful was ordered to present himself at the MACC headquarters today (March 15) at 3pm.

“Immediately after the order to attend the examination was handed over to us, we informed MACC that the date and time of the session set was not suitable for our client,” said Jethwani in the letter.

The letter, which was sighted by Malaysiakini, was made out to MACC investigation division senior superintendent Mohd Hizar Farhan Abdul Razi.

Threat to parliamentary privileges

Jethwani explained that Wan Saiful was unable to attend the session today as he needed to go to Penang to carry out his MP’s tasks and weekly activities that had been planned in advance.

Wan Saiful departs today and will only be back in Kuala Lumpur on March 17.

The Bersatu leader is considering presenting himself to the MACC headquarters next week, Jethwani added.

“As MACC has been informed before, our client is ready to cooperate if MACC can show why the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952 can be violated in this case when the speech given by our client was in Parliament.

“If these issues can be addressed by MACC, our client is ready to consider appearing next week,” he said.

According to Jethwani, Section 7 of the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act clearly shows that the order to attend the inspection issued to Wan Saiful is outside of MACC’s jurisdiction and goes beyond Parliament.

MACC’s actions could be seen as a threat to MPs who make their speeches in the interests of the people and parliamentary democracy in Malaysia, he said.

“This action goes beyond and violates the principle of separation of powers and the concept of parliamentary democracy in Malaysia which opens the door for enforcement officers to use any excuse to interfere or violate the rights and privileges and immunities of parliamentarians.

“Therefore, we respectfully believe that it is appropriate for MACC to investigate the limits of MACC’s jurisdiction to conduct inspections of MPs who speak in the Dewan Rakyat,” he said.

At the same time, in his letter, Jethwani informed the anti-graft body that Wan Saiful would copy the letter to Dewan Rakyat speaker Johari Abdul due to the serious impact of MACC’s actions against him on the institution of Parliament.

“We reserve all the rights of our clients and we will take appropriate legal action against the MACC if necessary,” he said.