COMMENT The assurance given by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) deputy chief, Mohd Shukri Abdull, a few days ago, is admittedly quite consoling and reassuring enough. The testimonies of over 100 witnesses were taken account of.

The investigation report on the "donations" to PM Najib Abdul Razak of RM2.6 billion and RM42 million by SRC International has now been submitted to the attorney-general.

While the investigation on the SRC was completed and presented to an independent panel earlier, the one involving the RM2.6 billion donation was still incomplete, as investigation regarding documents and statements involving several overseas financial institutions has yet to be accomplished.

Anxiety is, however, running high throughout the nation as the AG had given a verdict of a "No Further Action" (NFA) on 1MDB (Sept 11, 2015), on the investigation papers submitted by Bank Negara on Aug 21, 2015.

The evidence of wrongdoings at 1MDB must have been so clear-cut that Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) must have been under the expectation that AG would press for charges but the AG did not.

To recapitulate, BNM slapped AmBank a penalty sum of RM53.7 million for the various "compliances breaches" committed. Little else were known then of what the multiple breaches were exactly. BNM ostensibly remained astonishingly muted on this.

We didn’t even know whether the charges were related to the outcome of their investigation on 1MDB and especially in relation to the RM2.6 billion donation. Breaches of both Section 234 of the Financial Services Act and Section 245 of the Islamic Financial Services Act (2013), were alluded to.

Given the disturbing backdrop of opaqueness in the handling of the 1MDB fiasco, it is only fair that this writer pre-empts similar anticipation of a dismal outcome. This nation has already been notoriously dubbed globally as a nation of "crimes without criminals".

Graft includes accepting donations

It has been categorically made clear by many distinguished legal minds that the definition of graft or gratification, under Section 50 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act (MACC) 2009, includes accepting donations.

The section stated that any form of gratification was presumed to have been corruptly received and the situation is made a lot worse for themselves, when Najib, the president of Umno, decided that it was a "donation".

The MACC has reported earlier that the source was not from 1MDB and that the donor is from the Middle East. It does not really matter who and how many donors there were and why they "donated".

Najib has repeatedly said that he did not use the money for personal gain. It is now an open secret that the money was used to fund Umno-BN election machinery nationally in the 13th general election.

Najib has been on record as saying that it is wrong and illegal to accept donations meant for the party to one’s account. But he has no option but to concede that the huge donation was transferred to his personal accounts.

Without going into any depth of elucidation, I’ve only to remind the AG of the case of the former menteri besar of Selangor, Harun Idris, who was finally prosecuted for a similar offence, for a sum a lot smaller, while his bona fide intention and genuine mistake were known to all the party’s leaders and members.

Be that as it may, it would be a great folly on the part of the attorney-general to convince the nation otherwise and to hand down a verdict of "No Further Action" yet again.

DZULKEFLY AHMAD is strategy director, Parti Amanah Negara.