COMMENT | 'Selective prosecution' is a desperate cry of the accused

COMMENT | Why are there always loud cries of “selective prosecution” when politicians are charged with criminal offenses? Why is it that when big-wigs are charged, it is the same issue of “One rule for us and a different rule for them”?

These are screams of desperation and have been repeatedly used outside the courts as if they are proclamations of innocence.

Luckily, the word “persecution” had not been used because it then becomes a contemptuous issue. Persecution is the act of harassing or oppressing a person or a group of people. History books have recorded that thousands of people have faced persecution because of their religion, race, ethnicity, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and many other factors.

In Malaysia, persecution exists - especially against the LBGT community - but that’s another story altogether.

In Parliament on Nov 30, 2022, ambassador-designate to the United States, Nazri Abdul Aziz, claimed selective prosecution tinged with revenge had occurred under the previous Pakatan Harapan government and these cases are still in court.

He wished to ask both the MACC and the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) whether ongoing criminal prosecutions in court are free of any malicious intent that “may be present and existing” when the Harapan coalition was in government.

Similar claims have also been made by others, with the most notable of them being from former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin recently.

On Monday, Bersatu president Muhyiddin sang the same tune after the party’s information chief, Wan Saiful Wan Jan, was charged earlier in the day with corruption.

Claiming that the party was the victim of “selective prosecution”, he said Harapan and BN had also received funds from their supporters but questioned why their leaders were not charged in court.

He failed to comprehend or mention that the money, in Wan Saiful’s case, was allegedly paid in relation to government contracts.

Tacit admission of guilt?

A simple understanding of the phrase – selective prosecution – entails an argument that persons of different ages, races, religions, gender, or political affiliations were engaged in the same illegal acts but only one person was charged.

Can we infer that people making such accusations are themselves guilty but were not prosecuted or are yet to be prosecuted? Is it a tacit admission that they were all involved but only one single individual has been charged?

I neither have malicious intent nor am I accusing other parties of wrongdoing, but this is the interpretation found in various law journals. Who am I, an ordinary scribe to scream “selective prosecution” if I do not have knowledge of the criminal act?

The whole process of gathering evidence to prosecute under the MACC Act or the Penal Code is a tedious and painstaking exercise. Every issue has to be addressed and then submitted to the AGC for its consent to prosecute.

If there are gaping holes in the evidence gathered, the file is returned for further investigations. Only after these issues are sorted out and the AGC is convinced that there is prima facie evidence will the nod to prosecute be given.

It has been reported that several other personalities are being investigated and all that can be said is to take a number and wait to be hauled to court.

R NADESWARAN is a veteran journalist who writes on bread-and-butter issues. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

Jana Wibawa: Businessperson slapped with fresh charges

KINIGUIDE | What is the Jana Wibawa programme?

MACC denies bribing Wan Saiful to frame Muhyiddin

Bersatu's Wan Saiful, businessperson charged with graft

Zafrul confirms MACC summoned him for questioning

Why no LCS charges, MP asks 'more vindictive than Mahathir' PM