Ex-ACA officer 'insults our intelligence'

comments     Published     Updated

vox populi small thumbnail ‘It is to the benefit of MACC that reforms are carried out to prevent abuse and to regain the public trust... Otherwise more deaths will recur...’

On Ex-ACA top gun: Stop showering criticism on MACC

Ken: Ex-ACA officer Abdul Razak should not insult our intelligence by asserting that the ACA and MACC have always been neutral, working without fear or favour against the ruling party and the opposition. We can all experience with our own eyes and ears how "fair" the ACA and MACC have been. In fact, the MACC seems to be worse than the ACA it replaces, dropping even a thin pretence of fairness.

Another ex-ACA officer, Mohamad Ramli Manan, who was also interviewed in Malaysiakini has admitted that the agency was biased as any investigation carried out against members of the ruling party need the approval of the top.

If it is true that the MACC Act 2009 bestows wide powers of the investigating officer to call up witnesses at anytime and interrogate them without any limit, then such powers must be curbed as they are liable to be abused and have already been abused in Teoh Beng Hock's case. Relentless interrogation with sleep deprivation is also a form of torture so what difference are we from Guantanamo Bay?

Does the MACC need such wide powers of interrogation? Are they meant to break down a person to force confessions? If the MACC has a case, why do they need to extract confessions if they can prove their case by other evidence?

It is to the benefit of MACC that reforms are carried out to prevent abuse and to regain the public trust so that it can operate efficiently. Otherwise more deaths will recur and the MACC may well be known as Umno's Gestapo.

Peter Ooi:

Abdul Razak, the public would very much like your advice, but reactions from all quarters in the government prevent us from doing so. The royal commission was set up after so much hue and cry from the public. Otherwise, Teoh would be just one of the statistics of death under custody of MACC.

Looking at the terms of reference, many still wonder why it did not include the cause of Teoh's death. Doesn't this exclusion reinforce the public negative perception of MACC?

Abdul Razak seemed to be very confidence that action will be taken against culprits for Teoh's death if found so by the royal commission. I would very much like to have the same confidence. Going by the recommendation of past inquiries showed otherwise.

Lingam's tape scandal inquest is a classic example. It clearly implicated the infamous five and still MACC is unable to take any action. I believe the investigation on this matter is closed for good. Do you think this time around, things would be different. You better hope so. Till today no one is charged for Kugan's death.

For a mere RM24,000, Teoh was questioned till the wee hours of the morning. Did they question Khir Toyo till the wee hours of the morning?

If I am not mistaken, Khir Toyo emerges grinning from cheek to cheek after questioning by MACC. Was Teoh accorded the same procedure of questioning?

Oh yes, this can be confirmed from CCTV which recorded the questioning session. Khir Toyo said his session was recorded. Was Teoh's recorded? Allow the public to view and compare the mode of questioning and only then we can make a fair conclusion to MACC's fairness.

Big wigs are not spared? So far, can Abdul Razak quote any successful prosecution of a real big fish. If really big wigs are not spared, I believe by now many are walking in the corridor of Pudu jail. We believe MACC had investigated even prime minister. How intense was the investigation? Is it the same degree as in the case of Teoh who was questioned till early morning?

Abduk Razak lacked sincerity when he defended MACC for questioning witness till early morning. He said complainants can be questioned any time of the day. Very fair enough. A complainant went to give evidence voluntarily. If he goes to make report at 3am, he must be prepared to give evidence till 6am or 7am.

In Teoh's case, he was not a complainant. He was hauled up to give evidence and therefore should not be subjected to the same conditions. No matter how beautiful a picture is painted for MACC, it has to prove by its actions and not mere rhetorics.

On Anti-ISA movement 'betrayed'

Rakyat from Selangor:

Malaysiakini has highlighted the anger of many people over Gerakan Youth chief Lim Si Pin’s last-minute withdrawal of support for the anti-ISA gathering.

The announcement by Gerakan Youth to join the GMI gathering was made by Lim along with his legal bureau head. Didn't he know that the gathering is not likely to get a police permit? Why would he then announce he was joining the gathering?

MYB: Gerakan Youth chief Lim Si Ping tried to be a party hero but ended up betraying everyone around him and the ideology of Gerakan.

First, he said he would join the GMI gathering without knowing whether it is legal or illegal.

Then he withdrew from the gathering and submitted a memorandum on his own because the GMI rally was illegal. In fact, he posted in his blog saying that the rally was legal.

Add to that, he didn’t even bother to check the palace protocol before sending his memorandum. I hope he has learnt a very painful and shameful lesson.



Malaysiakini
news and views that matter


Sign In