As the whistleblower, embroiled in an alleged corruption storm, continues to seek protection, a veteran legal eagle has sunk his claws into the matter.

In a Facebook post this evening, Haniff Khatri Abdulla pointed out that MACC must accept the reality that it needs the whistleblower’s testimony to bring forth charges against the politicians who were implicated.

Likening the legal debate between MACC and the whistleblower’s lawyer to the “chicken or egg” situation, he said: “Records would show that in corruption cases brought to court in Malaysia until now, the majority of them involve one party, usually the recipient of the bribe.”

“It is based on this reality, I am recommending MACC to give the whistleblower immunity even if he is the individual who gave the (alleged) bribes.

“MACC must accept the reality that it needs this individual to bring charges (against) the recipients of the bribe,” he added.

Therefore, Haniff said there is no need for MACC to drag its feet in giving protection to the whistleblower from civil or criminal action.

“And to protect him from any potential actions which can cause him harm as well as to keep the information (provided) confidential until the investigation is completed and if possible, until action is taken in court,” he added.

Haniff also explained what would happen if MACC, in the course of its investigation, discovers that there have been false claims in the whistleblower’s complaint, which warrants action to be taken against him.

“At that time, MACC can contemplate, apart from the issue of whether he is the giver of the bribe or otherwise, if the falsehoods in his testimony require the immunity to be revoked.

“Even if that happens, the whistleblower can mount a legal challenge under Section 11 of the same Act over the revocation of the immunity.

“The court will then decide if MACC has the right to revoke the immunity or otherwise,” he added.

Based on the above, Haniff said both parties should not have reservations or complicate the immunity issue.

“So that MACC can launch an investigation into the alleged videos… as soon as possible. This is because the delay can complicate the investigation, what more when the (implicated) quarters have political powers,” he added.

On the same note, Haniff also disagreed with the need to appeal for the prime minister’s intervention.

“This is because the law and the discretionary powers of MACC are clear. We do not need to ask the executive to intervene.

“Don’t we condemn the interference of the executive as wrong (when it is believed to have happened)? So why do we need to ask the assistance of the executive in this case?

“This is the mentality that prevents the country from progressing… We need to be consistent in our stand regarding the separation of powers,” he added.

Haniff also said the new Attorney-General Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar, who was appointed earlier today, could advise MACC on the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 to ensure this matter is expedited.

Earlier today, Malaysiakini reported that the whistleblower, through the legal firm Izwan Mazniza Kamil and Associates, sent a letter to Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim regarding his request for protection.

The whistleblower has also disclosed the 17-second audio clip that his lawyer had played for MACC officers during a meeting on Oct 30.