YOURSAY ‘He may not have been directly involved in closing the case but he certainly needs to address the allegation that he drafted/prepared the second SD.’

MACC panel: Cecil Abraham not involved in closing case

Lover Boy: Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s operations review panel (ORP) comprises experts in various fields to oversee the investigations of the MACC.

Panel chairperson Hadenan Abdul Jalil, you said that senior lawyer Cecil Abraham had no part to play in decision making in this particular case, although he is part of the panel.

Can I assume that when a matter comes up for ORP to decide on a particular matter, the papers are circulated to all members of the panel?

Did you as the chairperson of ORP receive a letter from Cecil that he was disqualifying himself because there was a conflict of interest and the reason was that he drafted private eye P Balasubramaniam’s second SD (statutory declaration)?

Absalom: As a layperson, it seems to me that the conflict of interest (whether there was or not) is far less of a crime than drafting a false SD for a key witness to sign, thereby meddling with evidence and in effect obstructing justice in no less than a murder case.

Slumdog: This is unbelievable twaddle. Hadenan said that “the panel had agreed with the deputy public prosecutor’s decision to stop the investigation on grounds that the testimonies given by major witnesses were not supported by other witnesses, and the credibility of the major witnesses was disputable.”

So what he is saying is that if you have a witness to a crime, you cannot accept the testimony of that witness because you need another witness to corroborate the statement of the first witness.

Isn’t it the practice in law for the defence or prosecutor to question or challenge the witness’s sworn statement in court? 

How can the public prosecutor make a summary decision that the credibility of the witness is disputable? Shouldn’t the credibility of the witness be tested in a court?

Onyourtoes: Hadenan, what expertise do you (and your panel) have to decide whether or not a case is believable or not? How do you decide on the credibility of the witnesses? Must witnesses collaborate? Have you checked the truth, even if there is only one witness?

Then you said, “Cecil Abraham was not present nor involved in the meeting.” But Cecil Abraham is a member; he could have attended the meeting if he was there, am I right?   

OMG!!: Bala’s lawyer Americk Singh Sindu had a detailed account of the suspicious circumstances leading to the signing of the second SD - names, places, time and date.

If what he has alluded is true and if the MACC had done a thorough investigations as the intense interrogations that led to the death of Teoh Beng Hock, surely it would have arrived at a different conclusion.

As such, the MACC panel is guilty of incompetence for taking the MACC’s words for granted.

Pemerhati: Quote: “Hadenan stressed that the panel functions as a check-and-balance mechanism in the MACC, where all investigations done by the commission will be submitted to the panel members for their feedback. The panel members consist of those with expertise and who represent professional bodies, and they make decisions without interference from any party.”

The panel members, just like the top judges in the judiciary, are appointed with the approval of PM Najib Razak, who has almost dictatorial powers in the country.

Under the prevailing system in the country, how can you expect the panel members to act any differently from the judges in a case where Najib is involved?

Starr: The MACC panel's decision to stop investigation is a collective decision of the panel, and as such whether the senior lawyer in question participated in that decision-making is irrelevant.

If indeed he was involved in the drafting of the Bala's second SD, there's a 'perceived' conflict of interest which he should have avoided given his official position in the panel, let alone the issue of ethics.

As a professional, he should have known the need not only to maintain his 'independence', but be seen to be so.

Mahashitla: It is shocking to learn that Cecil Abraham, a practising lawyer for 40 years and his son Sunil and firm Zul Rafique & Partners, did not come out to vigorously denounce the allegations that father and son were involved in Bala's second SD. Instead, the MACC operations review panel was talking on Cecil's behalf.

Such response by MACC and non-response by Cecil Abraham and his son only thickens the wall of suspicious cover-ups for Najib and Rosmah Mansor in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case.

Anonymous #41809171: Cecil Abraham may not have been directly involved in closing the case, but he certainly needs to address the allegation that he drafted/prepared the second SD for Bala to sign.

Failure to do so just ratchets up the doubts regarding the transparency and independence of MACC's operations review panel.

Anon: Cecil, I believe, is extremely busy, so the press has not been able to get him. He should probably issue a statement through the Bar Council so everything can be cleared up.

The Saint: A man of his expereince and knowledge should have come forward on his own accord to tell Malaysians that he was not present at the MACC panel meeting and cleared his name.

He probably thought that his name would not surface and as usual Malaysians will forget the whole issue after a period of time

Lionking: So is this an example of professional prostitution that Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah was talking about ?

It appears that all the wrongdoings was probably known by many so-called professionals and yet nothing was done. However, the truth is so powerful that it will eventually emerge.

InPursuitofJustice: Okay, let's assume what MACC said is true. Can we move on? Is that all MACC has to say or do?

What they need and must do is take action to reopen the investigation. And the PM and his wife must respond to the allegations. Their silence will only draw adverse inference from the public.

Armageddon: When a group of people was not happy with the Bar Council, they decided to form an alternative bar council. Can we do the same with MACC?

Ferdtan: The series of Deepak Jaikishan’s explosive revelations concerning Bala’s second statutory declaration, the naming of Najib’s brother and his wife, Rosmah’s involvement and the allegation that Cecil Abraham may have a hand in drafting the second SD were not reported in all our mainstream media.

All these are juicy enough to be newsworthy in any media around the world. The cyber media are screaming with stories and comments that never seem to end, and yet the mainstream media is so silent that you can hear a pin drop.

Are we living in the same world as these people? Now I’m beginning to believe in the idea of a parallel world that exists alongside ours - Umno’s and the real world.

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .