Rosmah S Can I Advise You Clip Vs Sabah Videos

---

MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki recently issued a statement declaring that the eight videos allegedly involving Sabah assemblypersons cannot be used as evidence due to concerns over their credibility, saying they were edited.
This announcement sparked widespread public outrage and ridicule, with many Malaysians mocking the statement.
This controversy raised a serious question. As we can recall, the “Can I advise you something” voice recording could be accepted as evidence in the 2021 corruption trial involving former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak and his wife Rosmah Mansor, why are videos - clearer and more comprehensive - being dismissed as unreliable?
In the Najib-Rosmah trial, the audio clip of a conversation between the two was used as evidence, with the voices identified as those of Najib and Rosmah by the former education minister.
If a simple audio recording can be valid, why are videos - showing the individuals involved, the amounts of money discussed, political support, and the purposes of the money - deemed to lack credibility?
Isn’t it the MACC’s responsibility to investigate these allegations and determine the credibility of the evidence? Why did Azam issue a statement rejecting the videos instead of explaining the next steps in investigating the serious corruption allegations raised by the videos?
Furthermore, in December 2024, former MACC chief commissioner Latheefa Koya strongly stated that the case was a clear instance of corruption and called for urgent legal scrutiny.
She affirmed that the videos presented clear evidence of corruption, not political donations, as some had claimed. Latheefa also revealed that the assemblypersons involved had admitted to receiving money from a businessperson in exchange for mining exploration licenses and political support for the chief minister of Sabah.
The differing opinions between the current and former MACC chiefs have added to public confusion and frustration. What Malaysians want is transparency and accountability in addressing corruption allegations.
Scepticism about the investigation
In the case of the Sabah scandal, there has been a lack of transparency regarding the investigation. We do not know if anyone has been remanded, or if witnesses have been brought in for questioning.
Unlike past high-profile corruption cases, where media outlets were able to report extensively on the investigation, details surrounding the Sabah case remain scarce. The public is left in the dark, which only fuels scepticism about the seriousness of the investigation.
Just two days ago, Azam said during a session with Negeri Sembilan state assemblypersons that “controls with transparency and integrity are necessary, as money politics could lead to abuse of power and irregularities.”
MACC chief commissioner Azam BakiHe emphasised that compliance and integrity from politicians are essential to end money politics and promote a cleaner government.
I believe Azam’s statement was well-received by the public, offering hope that the fight against corruption could indeed be strengthened in Malaysia.
Even though Azam made this statement in Negeri Sembilan, it resonates strongly with the hope that the Sabah corruption scandal will be the first major case in 2025 that can prove the MACC’s credibility and commitment to justice.
Malaysians are watching closely, and the actions taken - or not taken - regarding this case will speak volumes about the MACC’s ability to act with transparency, integrity, and accountability. - Mkini
YONG TAIN VUI is the political assistant to Warisan deputy president Darell Leiking.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---