Attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali should list down in detail all monetary transactions - especially those involving politicians - which by his definition are no longer considered linked to graft and corruption, said Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng.
"This redefinition of graft will save the police, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), and the deputy public prosecutors from having to waste time investigating and attempting to charge those that shouldn't be (by Apandi's reckoning).
"Indeed, there must be legal amendments made to the statutes and text books so that there will be no more miscarriage of justice," suggested the DAP elected representative.
Lim argued the above can avoid such wastes of time as the hullabaloo involving the RM2.6 billion 'donation', the use of orphan foundation Yayasan Pembangunan Ekonomi Islam Malaysia (Yapeim) funds for overseas trips , and the millions paid in commission for consultants in defence purchases - all of which have been considered to be kosher despite exhaustive investigations.
He was referring to reports that political analyst Razak Baginda had admitted to receiving RM137 million in commission for consultation work in the purchase of two Scorpene-class attack submarines by Malaysia from French shipyard DCNS.
However, Razak has since denied that it was for paying off Malaysian officials.
Similarly, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has been cleared of criminal wrongdoings by Apandi with regard to the fortuitous RM2.6 billion in the form of a “donation” that the PM admitted to having been deposited into his personal accounts by foreign royalty, denying having misused or abused it for personal use, adding that a large part of it has been returned.
Earlier, another minister was also absolved for having been involved in the use of funds from Yapeim to fund an overseas trip to officiate a wedding course, which included official golfing sessions.
How much more are we paying in commissions?
The Segambut MP said that Najib - who was defence minister and said to be Razak's superior at the material time - should answer as to why the analyst was picked to facilitate the military procurement deal, and not experts in the Defence Ministry.
"Is Razak an expert in naval hardware or can he steer a submarine? Why is it that the Royal Malaysian Navy's procurement department was not consulted for the US$1.2 billion (RM3.6 billion then) purchase? Was the commission brought up for discussion in the cabinet?"
Lim questioned how much has the country paid for every purchase of jet fighter, tank, bullet proof vehicle for VVIPs and others, if the government - and by extension, taxpayers - had to pay for consultancy fees for every purchase of sophisticated and expensive hardware.
"How about the amount taxed by the Inland Revenue Board on the RM137 million that Razak received? Are there any tax records for it?" he asked further.
According to reports, the commission to Razak was not paid for by the Malaysian government, but by DCNS directly to Razak.
Critics are, however, alleging that the money was not for the analyst - but for pay-offs to local officials, which they alleged included the then defense minister.
This is something that Najib, Razak and the legal representative of the DCNS official charged with financial improprieties in a French court, have denied and dismissed as political smear tactics against the PM.