The de facto law minister was incorrect in saying that whistleblowers who recorded the scandalous Lingam tape are protected under Section 53 of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997, said PKR vice-president R Sivarasa today.

Sivarasa, a lawyer, also cast doubt over the professional conduct of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), citing a shocking revelation in the Malaysia-Today blog.

The blog entry entitled 'A den of thieves' alleged various forms of abuse of power by ACA officers. It also posted a letter by the lawyer acting for Federal Commercial Crime director commissioner police Ramli Yusuff.

The letter said the identity of informants assisting the police Commercial Crime Investigation Department in the arrest and investigation of a businessman had been kept secret until ACA ordered Ramli to reveal their names for its own investigation.

It was claimed that ACA officers contacted the informants and subjected them to pressure and threats to make them change their statements to the police, in order to acquit the businessman of any wrongdoing.

Based on this, Sivarasa said only a full public process and legal immunity granted by a royal commission of inquiry could provide sufficient protection to whistleblowers who recorded the footage in the 'Lingam tape'.

"We must not forget that there are many persons who are in power and who are connected to those in power who have an interest in the source not coming forward," he said in a statement today.

"Even if the identity of the source is revealed in confidence to the authorities, we are not confident that the safety of the source will not be compromised.

Over the weekend, minister Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz had said that legislation would afford protection to the whistleblowers.

'Authentication is simple'

Sivarasa further rebutted Nazri's statement that the co-operation of the whistleblowers is needed in order to confirm the authenticity of the recording, said to have been made in 2002 but which was given to PKR last month.

"It is no rocket science to figure this out. Give an appropriate copy of the video clip to a relevant expert in this field and the person will be able to confirm whether the video clip is an authentic recording or not in a matter of a few hours," he said.

"Such an expert will be able to do the job that this so-called independent panel has been appointed to do much more quickly, reliably and cheaply. We can then get on with the more important job of a Royal commission into the state of the judiciary."

He also refuted the minister's claims, reported in the media today, that plastic surgery and a new identity can be given to whistleblowers as form of protection under the Witness Protection Bill.

"For one thing, no such Bill has ever been tabled in Parliament. For a minister who is supposed to be in charge of law, he displays confusion as to the existing laws in the country," he noted.

An independent panel is currently investigating the authenticity of the tape. The ACA has separately questioned Sivarasa, PKR worker Sim Tze Tzin and de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim, but they have withheld the identity of the whistleblowers.

As a result, Sivarasa and Sim have been slapped with a notice to reveal their sources, failing which they may be prosecuted and are liable to a jail sentence on conviction.

Related story: Mr Nazri, what witness protection bill?

SPECIAL REPORT: The Lingam tape