A+ | A- | Reset
Home arrow The Blogs arrow News/Commentaries arrow A-G closed EPU case

A-G closed EPU case PDF Print
Wednesday, 09 April 2008 01:30

(The Sun) - The Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA)'s investigation into a former director-general of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) took three years and was completed in 2001 but the Attorney-General (A-G) closed the case due to "inconsistent witness statements and lack of supporting statements".

ACA investigation director Datuk Mohd Shukri Abdull told a press conference today the ACA had submitted its investigation papers to the A-G, and that it was not true it closed the case before it was completed.

“The A-G found there were inconsistent statements from witnesses and lack of supporting statements. Therefore, the A-G was of the opinion that investigation must stop and the case closed,” he said in the ACA headquarters.

As for the alleged interference by former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad with the ACA investigation, as claimed by former United Nations Special Rapporteur Datuk Param Cumaraswamy who referred to court records, Mohd Shukri said ACA understands that it was under police investigation as a report was made to the police.

He said any questions should be posed to the police, in particular the Inspector-General of Police. IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan, when contacted by phone today, refused to comment.

The EPU officer's case was "resurrected" last Wednesday (April 2) when Param, in a letter to theSun, quoted this alleged misdeed of Mahathir which needed investigation. He was taking up Mahathir's earlier offer to be subjected to investigation by foreign agencies for any misdeed by him during his 22-year premiership.

Param had referred to ACA former director-general Datuk Shafee Yahya's court testimony in the June 2000 trial of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in which he was asked about an ACA probe on the then director-general of the EPU.

The court records showed that Shafee was asked whether a big sum of money was found in the drawer of the director-general. Shafee later said the prime minister (then Mahathir) asked him to close the case.

Mahathir, in a letter to theSun published today, claimed Shafee was the one who shouted at him and accused him of interfering in the agency's investigation when he asked whether he intended to pursue the probe.

Mohd Shukri said following this disclosure (by Param), ACA took the initiative to call Shafee for information on what actually happened.

“Shafee told us he was called by the police in 2000 and they had recorded his statement. The ACA also contacted the police to check on this matter,” he said.

Asked what was ACA’s finding on the case against the former EPU director-general, he said he could not give details as it was not during his time.

Mohd Shukri, however, who became investigation director in 2006, said the A-G did not necessarily have to follow recommendations or suggestions made by the ACA in its report.

Asked if there have been any reports or files opened against Mahathir, he said during his time, there was none.

He also stressed that to his knowledge, since 1996 when he became state investigation director until now, there has never been any interference by the government or national leaders in any ACA investigation.

“No one has ever told us to stop half-way. Never. In fact, the ACA does not have the power to investigate half-way. Once we have started investigation, we must complete our paper and submit it to the A-G.

“The current leadership under Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has never done that too. Never at all has Pak Lah asked the ACA to do this or that, or told us not to do this or that. I’m telling you the truth. Never,” he said.

Asked whether it is possible the ACA did not investigate the alleged interference by Mahathir because it would be prejudicial to its own interest as the agency is under the Prime Minister’s Department, he said "no".

“The ACA does not interfere. It was a police case. It was their jurisdiction,” he said, adding there cannot be two separate investigations on a same case.

Comments (13)Add Comment
...
written by Spear Bing, April 09, 2008 01:39:55
ACA kicking the ball to PDRM and back and forth. Sigh........

The one who should be investigated is the AG himself. He has too many skeletons in his cupboard. He wields great influential power. Open a file for him.
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 16
...
written by Iliyas, April 09, 2008 01:45:50
A typical chicken and egg situation.My ignorant question to this highly intellectuals A-G,ACA and the IGP is,Who do you actually report to?I rest my case.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 9
...
written by joeyhuang, April 09, 2008 02:12:14
I wonder HOW these people sleep with their conscience and educate their family and children the importance of Truth and Integrity when living this human life!
In their death bed, the picture of TRUTH will surface.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 9
...
written by apanama, April 09, 2008 05:23:01
Economic Planning Unit is under Jabatan PERDANA MENTERI.
you can guess who was the Prime Minister?

ACA and AG Chambers are under whose control?
is it the Home Affairs Ministry?
who was the PM-cum-Home Affairs Minister-cum-Finance Minister?

ANSWER: MAMAKPUNDEKKUTTY
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 5
...
written by bn haramjadah, April 09, 2008 06:32:47
ACTUALLY investigations should be carried out on the attorney general and his office, they always seem to close files and declare no futher action, THE police nor the ACA will not file cases with the ag if there was no proof, the police and ACA also know the law, therfore what this tell you is that its not only the judicary which is corrupt, something is very wrong with the ag office, it stinks to high heaven, WILL ZAID IBRAHIM BE WILLING TO OPEN INVESTIGATIONS ON THE AG'S OFFICE, ITS NO Use reforming the judicary if the ag just closes the files, this is tentamount to obstruction of justice, and also if Malaysia wants to see itself reach the first world stage, this mockery of the supreme law of the land must be addressed, what will it take, a revolution, well something very simmiliar to that happened on the 8th march, well zaid what are you waiting for, or is it you were just brought in to warm up your chair, or is this another bad-mawi sendiwara, all slogans, isi tak ada. or cakap tak serupa bikin
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 12
...
written by billyong, April 09, 2008 07:44:46
"....but the Attorney-General (A-G) closed the case due to "inconsistent witness statements and lack of supporting statements". So what else is new????? smilies/tongue.gif
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 7
...
written by Sidq, April 09, 2008 08:47:13
Investigation must be done on this AG itself. A lot of cases were swept under the carpet. It was as if he was the one who decide wheather to proceed or close the case. It was as if he is the law
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 4
...
written by Mr Smith, April 09, 2008 09:01:48
One of the reasons BN lost in the General Elections is due the abuse of the judicial system by the AG, IGP, and ACA chief. They were there to protect eote criminals from the establishment.
This group was enjoyed immunity from prosecution regardless of their crimes.
The Judiciary cannot be fully reformed by appointing up righteous judges alone. How can the criminals be convicted if their cases are not even brought to the courts? How are the judges going to find them guilty?
No feudal minded AG from our culture will have the courage, conviction and gall to prosecute the PM or any senior UMNO leaders/minister.
http://mrsmith2.********.com
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2
...
written by Mik, April 09, 2008 09:08:11
These ppl showing us wayang kulit la. Buat news about so called investigation, then tarik sampai bertahun tahun, then cakap kes buang n not enuf eviden ce coz no one coming out with evidence. If ACA n POLICE, AG ...semua government servant wat...so they only work for the benefit of those ministers.not rakyat. aiya.. bosan n waste of time. might as well... i go back reading comics. better than watching tv3 or rtm. or listening to these so called law enforcers making comments.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 1
...
written by Mr Smith, April 09, 2008 09:08:34

Kindly delete the above which contains grammatical errors. Sorry.

=============
One of the reasons BN lost in the General Elections was due the abuse of the judicial system by the AG, IGP, and ACA chief. They were there to protect "criminals" from the elite group in the Establishment.
This group enjoyed immunity from prosecution regardless of the seriousness and gravity of their crimes.
The Judiciary cannot be fully reformed by appointing uprighteous judges alone.

How can the criminals be convicted if their cases are not even brought to the courts? How are the judges going to find them guilty?

No AG, IGP or ACA chief, from our feudal minded culture and subservience to the elite, will have the courage, conviction and gall to prosecute the PM or any lowly UMNO minister.
Examples are apleanty - Isa Samad, Zakaria Deros, Rafidah, Mahathir, Eusoff Chin, etc, etc, etc

http://mrsmith2.********.com
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2
...
written by Counterpointer, April 09, 2008 09:17:34
It's not hard to imagine this AG happily stamping away with his favourite rubbers stamp as below. Many cases seemingly got closed this way,BELIEVE IT OR NOT ! :



report abuse
disagree 0
agree 3
...
written by devious17, April 09, 2008 09:31:57
Tu laa ape suh hangpa pi pangkah dacing berat seblah tuu? Padan muka kamu laa, skang si tun tu makin bermaharajalela, dah la pencen tapi dok menyibuk tak habis habis,dah pencen buat la macam dah pencen ,tanam bunga ke, bela ikan puyu ke,sembang kosong kat warung ke,ape ape je lah.

Nih dak, asyik mengutuk bodohwi jee siang malam, patut tun nih sumbat masuk isa laa sebab mengugat ketenteraman jiran jiran sekalian. smilies/cheesy.gif
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by babakl, April 09, 2008 10:35:54
Look at Anwar's case, wrong date, building does not exist then and all kinds of make up story is still relevent. Proof of the truth, is irrelevent. So, it is only selective case cos it depends who is being investigate.If you r in the wrong side, inconsistance is a very good evidence.Proof and declaration by oath is irrelevent and not accepted.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 4

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
 
Some Images Hosted With
Thank You ImageShack!
 BLOGGERS AGAINST ISA

Powered and Optimized for:
Malaysia Today by MT-TEAM