A Mockery Of Fight Against Corruption

---

 


Prosecution actions resulting in charges dismissed two days ago in a high-profile case involving the bumiputera help scheme Jana Wibawa tears to shreds faith in the government’s commitment to fight corruption cleanly across the board without fear or favour.
It highlights again the gentle treatment of politicians in corruption, following acts to get former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak out of prison and under house arrest, and the discharges not amounting to acquittal (DNAAs) of Najib and others, including Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
The fault is not the judiciary, which can only rule on the charges made and brought to court. It lies with the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), which has enabled DNAAs and, in the latest case, yielded to a letter of representation from the defendants.
While such matters are the sole discretion of the AG, are they in the interests of justice and fair play, and lead to the protection of the public good and the all-important rule of law principle advocated by civilised countries everywhere?
Is the AG fit for the job?
The concomitant question for the prime minister himself is whether the AG is doing a fit enough job to curb corruption and whether he should continue in his position with fresh instructions or be dismissed. Will a similar benevolent fate fall upon Muhyiddin Yassin, who set up Jana Wibawa in 2020?
Former prime minister Muhyiddin YassinIt is interesting to note that Muhyiddin also filed a letter of representation over his case last month, seeking the withdrawal of seven charges against him involving abuse of power and receiving funds from unlawful activities.
Muhyiddin, the Bersatu president and the then prime minister, was charged with four counts of abuse of power for allegedly soliciting RM232.5 million in bribes in connection with the Jana Wibawa project between March 1, 2020, and Aug 20, 2021.
He further faces three charges of receiving RM200 million in illegal proceeds from Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, which were deposited into Bersatu’s Ambank and CIMB Bank accounts.
On Wednesday, the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court acquitted and discharged Segambut Bersatu deputy chief Adam Radlan Adam Muhammad of all 12 corruption and money laundering charges related to the Jana Wibawa project.
Letter of representation
This followed a letter of representation by the defence, after which Adam saw all charges against him dropped in return for a payment of a compound fine of a mere RM4.1 million.
Segambut Bersatu deputy chief Adam Radlan Adam MuhammadHe was charged with corruption involving RM4.6 million allegedly received in two cases, as much as RM5.3 million said to be solicited in two cases, and a further charge related to facilitating contract awards. Further, he faced money laundering charges, seven in all, involving over RM3 million in transactions.
The acquittal came after he paid RM4.1 million in compound fines, the amount he was alleged to have received as inducement from Lian Tian Chuan and Mat Jusoh as payment for helping Nepturis Sdn Bhd and MIE Infrastructure & Energy secure two Jana Wibawa projects.
All the charges were framed under Section 16(a)(A) of the MACC Act 2009 and are punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a fine of not less than five times the amount of the bribe or RM10,000, whichever is higher.
Totalling up the charges on corruption alone amounts to nearly RM10 million. Five times that is RM50 million - the fine he is liable to under the charges. On top of that, he has been acquitted of all charges and does not spend any time in prison.
Deputy public prosecutor Farah Yasmin Salleh said that MACC had accepted Adam’s representation letter on June 3 and agreed to a proposal under Section 92(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing, and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Amla).
The section provides for compounding the offence at an amount not exceeding 50 percent of the maximum fine for the offence. Under Amla, the offence for money laundering is imprisonment for a term not exceeding 15 years and a fine of not less than five times the sum or value of the proceeds or RM5 million, whichever is higher.
Under just Amla alone, the offence would have attracted a fine of RM15 million and up to 15 years in prison. Thus, the RM4.1 million compound fine just amounts to the figure alleged to have been paid to Adam, rather low under the circumstances.
The usual arguments
Yes, we will hear the usual arguments. The prime minister will say he does not interfere in judicial matters, but he should when it is not. An appointee of his - the AG - seems remiss in doing his duty and avowed stated intention to fight corruption. The AG is not part of the judiciary but the administration.
What kind of example is being set when DNAAs and now letters of representation are used to effectively set people free without even a record of crimes committed in cases which appear to be strong on the surface?
And if Muhyiddin moves to the right side of politics, does it mean that the prosecution will also bestow benevolence on him by accepting his letter of representation by paying a much smaller amount in compound fines and having no offence recorded against him?
If that’s the way that the prosecution of politicians proceeds in future, corruption will not only survive but will thrive and kick. It’s a mockery of the fight against corruption - nothing else. - Mkini
P GUNASEGARAM says that Lord Acton’s saying, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”, is the ultimate statement on corruption. That’s why no one - not Trump, not Anwar, not anyone in between - should be given absolute power.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---