Is Anwar Assuming The Role Of Ag

---

 


In trying to justify the absence of any prosecution against some Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) leaders allegedly accepting bribes to facilitate Albert Tei’s bid for a mineral exploration licence, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim seemed to assume the role of the attorney-general (AG) by insisting that the videos alone do not constitute sufficient evidence.
Apparently, there are 14 Sabah politicians being implicated in the businessperson’s videos, and so far, only two have been charged with corruption. Tei was also charged with giving them bribes.
Assuming Anwar was right in saying that the videos alone do not constitute sufficient evidence, was it legally proper for him to issue such an uncalled-for statement?
How about more than 300 pages of evidence submitted by Tei to the MACC - including money trails, bank records, documents, and written correspondence to fortify his claims in the videos? Is this evidence inadequate, too?
Being the prime minister who has participated in the election campaign in Sabah, it was to be expected for Anwar to be grilled by journalists in Kota Kinabalu about the issue of videos depicting some GRS leaders allegedly accepting bribes to facilitate Tei’s bid for a mineral exploration licence.
Anwar definitely needed to respond to the journalists’ question about the issue amid concerns that his image is being clouded by his coalition’s cooperation with GRS, which is staving off graft allegations.
Businessperson Albert TeiWorse, he has also been accused of turning a blind eye towards the scandal due to his cooperation with GRS. Hence, responding to such questions was, in my view, quite reasonable.
Nevertheless, the real issue here is not whether he should have or should not have responded to such questions. The real problem lies in the way he responded to such questions.
To begin with, he should have never responded to the aforesaid questions by acting like a top-notch lawyer and, in turn, descending into legal arguments.
It was simply not his territory to try to offer legal justification for such a legal issue. He should have passed the buck to the AG.
Granted, he has vast experience appearing in courts of law as the accused. However, being frequently indicted for several crimes in the past does not ipso facto turn him into a legal eagle.
Regarding the allegations that his former aide, Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak, was granted tens of thousands of hectares of land in Sabah, Anwar responded by claiming such allegations were already disproven after MACC confirmed no land grant existed.
It is hoped the confirmation by MACC is sufficient to legally absolve Anwar’s former aide. But Anwar badly needs to convince the voters - especially in Sabah- that the confirmation by MACC would be easily and readily accepted by them without demur.
After all, the image and reputation of the MACC have been gravely sullied when Anwar’s government could not be bothered to heed the call by many quarters to not renew the contract of the controversial MACC chief for reasons known to him and everyone.
Malaysians may not be totally taken aback to learn that MACC cleared Farhash. Once upon a time, former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak was also cleared of any mega scandal via the no further action (NFA) decision issued by the then AG.
After all, in those days, we only heard a lot about mega crimes being committed, but we did not really see the real criminals being brought to book. - Mkini
Hanipa Maidin is a former deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Legal Affairs).
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---