When answers are provided regarding the allegations against Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, these are rejected, said Multimedia and Communications Minister Salleh Said Keruak.

He was responding to Transparency International chief Jose Ugaz , who in his speech at the International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC) in Putrajaya this afternoon, raised the RM2.6 billion controversy.

Salleh pointed out that the issue has been highly politicised.

"There is nothing you, I or anyone can say that would un-politicise this matter.

"Whatever response is given is going to be rejected as is evident for the responses already given, all which have been rejected.

"You demand an answer and yet reject all answers given. I do not see what more that can be said," he told Malaysiakini .

Among others, Ugaz ( photo ) said there remain unanswered questions surrounding the sum deposited into Najib's personal bank account, such as "who paid the money and why" as well as "where did the money go".

Alluding to Najib, he added that only one man can answer these questions.

Responding to this, Salleh said: "Basically what you are saying is only the prime minister can answer that question. That would mean you are not interested in a response from any other person other than the prime minister."

"In fact, a number of responses have already been given, even by the deputy prime minister and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, but apparently this is not good enough and you are not prepared to accept those responses," he added.

The RM2.6 billion has been described as political donation from a Middle Eastern source ahead of the last general election, and the MACC confirmed this.

Whereas Najib has denied using public funds for personal gain.

If the answers are not forthcoming, Ugaz said only a "fully independent investigation, free from political interference", could uncover the truth.

Until that happens, he added, no claim from the government on anti-corruption would be credible.

"I am not sure what you mean by 'fully independent investigation, free from political interference, can uncover the truth'," responded Salleh.

"Do you have a proposal on how that can be done?" he asked Ugaz.

Salleh argued that even the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) cannot be described as being free from political interference as it comprises politicians.

"And some of those politicians from the opposition who are members of the PAC keep making statements even while the investigation is still ongoing and before any conclusion is made.

"Therefore making the investigation prejudicial since the statements from these opposition PAC members is that a crime has been committed," he added.