The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission(MACC)’s decision that there is no criminal element in the audio clip allegedly featuring Muhyiddin Yassin’s voice in a Bersatu supreme council meeting in February 2020, enticing Umno defectors with minister posts and positions in government-linked companies (GLCs) in exchange for political support, proves that MACC has allowed itself to become a political weapon in favour or government leaders against the opposition leaders.
Two days ago, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Parliament and Law) Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar in a written reply to the DAP Kulai MP Teo Nie Ching said the MACC has completed its investigation into the audio clip involving the former prime minister and there was no element of wrongdoing under the MACC Act 2009 even though no one denies that the voice belonged to Muhyiddin. There is clearly double standard and selective prosecution by both the MACC and the Attorney-General when contrasted with me being charged for soliciting for corruption monies even though there was no such audio recording of me asking for money nor any such cash monies found in my person or in my bank account.
MACC did not act against those opposition MPs who openly admitted that they defected or jumped to support Muhyiddin due to such offers of government positions directly from Muhyiddin himself. Worse, Wan Junaidi said the MACC found no evidence of abuse of power in its investigation against former Prasarana non-executive chairperson and UMNO MP Tajuddin Abdul Rahman over alleged abuses of power during his tenure in Prasarana, even though MACC had already arrested him in May 2021.
This is probably the first time in history that an MP arrested by MACC is then let off and released without being charged in court. This follows a recent MACC’s decision not to proceed with charges of money laundering amounting to RM30 million against a former Sabah water department deputy director. Teo Chee Kong, one of four key suspects involved in the “Sabah watergate scandal”, one of the biggest corruption cases in the country, was facing 146 counts of money laundering charges involving RM32.93 million.
Teo was given a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) by the special corruption court in Kota Kinabalu after being informed the prosecuting team led by the MACC opted not to proceed with the case. The rationale for not proceeding with criminal charges was that the MACC and the federal Attorney-General had decided to impose a RM30 million compound against Teo.
MACC legal and prosecution division senior director Faridz Gohim said the compound is a form of punitive action against Teo, enables asset recovery of the lost funds and is a big success for the prosecution in terms of asset recovery. It is mind-boggling what type of big success is displayed when the full amount is not recovered and the person charged can be released after paying a portion of what he is alleged to have laundered?
One wonders the logic, accountability and public morality or ethics of a money laundering case for nearly RM33 million being settled with RM30 million. Should not MACC be also questioning the ability to afford to pay the RM30 million compound by a former civil servant?
Justice has not been upheld in these cases above. That MACC is slowly turning into a political weapon and its disappointing lack of consistency and commitment in combating corruption will only contribute to a further drop in the 2022 Malaysia’s Transparency International Corruption Perception Index which in 2021 declined to No. 62 from No. 51 in 2019.