YOURSAY | ‘His stand is clear - case closed. The best option now is a judicial review.’

Explain decision to the public, MACC panels tell AG

Res Ipsa: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) may engage with attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali, but what is going to transpire is pretty obvious.

It would be akin to the case of Bank Negara, which called for the prosecution of 1MDB for blatant breach of the investment approvals given by the central bank to troubled state-owned investment fund.

What transpired in that case is now history. A better option would be for Apandi is to explain the reasons for his decision to the public.

As MPs are the people's representatives, the best forum would be for Apandi to appear before the Dewan Rakyat. But will Apandi have the guts to do so?

Certainly it’s unlikely, seeing the manner he has disappeared overseas, almost immediately after making his highly controversial decision on the MACC papers. By the time Apandi returns, it will almost be towards the end of his tenure as the AG.

Therefore, the best option under the current circumstances will be to proceed with the judicial review without further delay and let the courts decide whether Apandi’s decision should stand.

Scandalcountry: Engage with Apandi for what? Take him to the court for alleged abuse of powers and misfeasance.

The deliberate abuse of power by a person holding public office is tortious and referred to as misfeasance in public office. Therefore, it is both a moral and legal duty of MACC to take the AG to court immediately.

The decisions of the AG can be challenged in court if irrelevant considerations are taken into account or if there is suspicion of abuse of power. He is not immune from prosecution. The best solution is to file an action for misfeasance against the AG.

Quigonbond: What do the MACC advisory panels mean by engaging with the AG? Chat with the AG over a cup of teh tarik? Pay him a courtesy visit?

Why don't they come out and say it out loud - our MACC officers have proposed three separate charges against Najib.

They are not wearing diapers - they are grown men, seasoned investigators and prosecutors. I would think they have read the law and understood what it takes to build the chain of evidence.

They should call the AG on his bluff and ask him to go to Parliament to answer questions from the people’s representatives.

Kim Quek: The MACC oversight panels are advisory in nature and cannot instruct either MACC or the Attorney-General's Chambers to act in any way deemed advisable.

So the best thing for MACC to do now is to have a brief discussion with the AG to assess whether the latter will reverse his decision.

If the assessment is negative, MACC should straightaway take the AG to court to answer for his alleged criminal conduct in wilfully closing cases against glaring unassailable evidence of guilt of the suspect under investigation.

Malaysia has come to crossroads, where the outcome of the Najib case will be pivotal to where the country will be heading.

Letting Najib off without any legal accountability will inflict irreparable damage to nation’s reputation, demoralise the government and the people, and cause rapid political and economic decline.

MACC, this is your moment. Grasp this opportunity and do something that will make the nation proud and earn the people’s eternal gratitude.

Odin Tajué: I support Kim Quek, whose comment here is, as his previous ones have been, meaningful.

The MACC must stand its ground. Should it find the AG's explanation unacceptable, it must take Apandi to court.

Doing that will be its baptism of fire — to let itself be scorched of all the doubts and the negative perception that the hoi polloi (common people) have been having of it and emerge as the mythological phoenix.

MinahBulat: Let's be clear about something. The AG has exercised his discretion to discontinue any offence against the PM. This is clear in Article 145 (3) of our Federal Constitution.

In so doing, Apandi has considered the MACC's report and he came out with a four-page statement that the prime minister is free from blame and there was no offence committed.

You want to engage with the AG for what? Ask him to eat his four-page statement and tell the world he was wrong? I say, don't waste your time.

Instead, file a judicial review to challenge the decision of the AG on a constitutional point that he has failed to exercise his discretion fairly.

Only the MACC can do that because it is privy to the investigation papers and has the facts. Further, MACC special operations director Bahri Mohd Zin has said that it is an ‘straightforward’ case . So do it.

Anonyxyz: It will be great if our constitution has to be read and written again to reflect our current dilemma. It looks like the PM, AG and IGP (inspector-general of police) are the three pillars of government control.

Anonymous_4031c: This ping-pong game has to stop. The AG has discretion, as provided under the Federal Constitution, unless such exercise of discretion was made mala fide.

The decision by AG must be judicious in nature and he owes his standing to the oath taken to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and country.

Unless the panels are prepared to disclose the reasons for the matter to the public (which it cannot) or make representations to the Agong directly on the matter of constitutional importance and abuse of powers, there isn't any point in engaging the AG further.

Simply put, don't waste time. MACC is a toothless tiger and its officers can be transferred out anytime, anywhere, as events have proven.

Anonymous 2362021442199789: Keep kicking the can down the road and ultimately it will drop into a drain and be washed away. Soon, all will be forgotten and life goes on.

When it comes to writing history, the winners will present the past as how they wish.

Kangkung 1M: And on what grounds Apandi prevented MACC officers from going overseas to pursue their investigations on the RM2.6 billion donation?

If that was in fact a donation, documents from the donors are relevant to support the investigation. Why is the AG interfering with the MACC investigations?

Oh Ya?: Is this the way these so-called MACC panels discharge their duties and responsibilities? What is the point of engaging with the AG, since he has already closed his door and mind.

Didn't he say that his decision cannot be challenged? Even though he might have made it arbitrarily and even mala fide?

It seems that only their creators can bring their wrath on them. These devils are too big and powerful for man-made institutions and laws to handle, especially in a failed state.

Beh Tahan: And in the first place, there aren't any good reasons for the AG to reject MACC recommendations. So how to explain?

Ghostwhowalks: Am I reading it right? It says in paragraph 9 of the Malaysiakini report that the panel is appointed by the PM "to receive and scrutinise reports from MACC regarding decisions on investigation papers made by AG and to present its views regarding actions upon cases where no charges are preferred".

Well, what is this panel doing by asking MACC to engage with AG again? I clearly read the panel is to present its views regarding actions upon cases where no charges are preferred by AG.

Go on and do your job and give your views. Do you agree with the AG or not? If not, please give your reasons. Don't just abdicate your duties, for goodness sake!

Abasir: One would have expected members of the oversight panels to resign en masse to demonstrate their collective disgust at this blatant disregard for the law and show their support for those who doggedly pursued the criminals.

But then, that would require that they be men of unimpeachable integrity.

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 .

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.