THE debate on how the audio recordings were released are still at a feverish pitch.

It will calm down soon and we can then get on with the business of investigating the message. The messenger, really, is not the issue, although it was unethical to divulge detailed information before an official investigation is carried out.

Even the comparison to the “Pavilion raid” was inappropriate as that, too, raised considerable debate in the same way. Trial by media never helps the cause for justice.

It was unethical of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to release all the information without being subjected to the rigours of veracity and admissibility through criminal investigations.

Nevertheless, the rule of law, if applied fairly and procedurally, can still ensure that justice can and will be done. The custodians of the criminal justice system must rise above the rhetoric and investigate the matter.

The rule of law will recalibrate any situation with the right balance and people in place, applying all the elements of investigations and subsequently, prosecution. There is no reason to worry about the rule of law as it will address any injustice with due process that is applied firmly and fairly.

All the evidence and how it was obtained will be subject to the test of admissibility. There is always remedy in tort, too, for anyone who feels that they have been defamed or falsely accused. It can lead to criminal responsibility, if it can be proven that the MACC acted in bad faith.

MACC chief Latheefa Koya must have had her reasons to release the audio recordings in such a manner. It is not unfamiliar practice for enforcement agencies to release such information for the consumption of the public.

It is normally to boost morale, confidence and trust of the public in the respective enforcement agencies. Normally, the agencies concerned receive accolades of praise, for such successes.

However, it becomes a contentious issue when suspects involved are very important people as it is now in the audio recordings saga.

Rather than jumping to any political insinuations, I would presume this was done in such a manner to expose the gravity of the betrayal and the magnitude of the offences alleged. Thus, we have to stop looking at the messenger and focus on the message.

The rule of law has, in the past, failed many cases of interest due to the inability of the system to ensure that justice is done. The cases involving Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu, the disappearances of Amri Che Mat and Raymond Koh, Teoh Beng Hock’s death and the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal, at the initial stages of investigation, are just some of the examples of such.

Investigations in all these cases were opaque, hindered and fell short in more ways than one. The rule of law at the material time could not ensure that justice was delivered due to the overwhelming influence of the executive.

Could this have been in the forefront of Latheefa’s mind?

Now that the MACC has lodged a police report on the audio recordings, investigations can commence to verify the evidence made available.

The police are again on the front lines of an investigation that will be explosive and will test every fibre of our criminal justice system. All those who conspired to prevent justice by attempting to doctor the investigations in question must be brought to justice.

The police have a monumental task ahead of them but they are capable of delivering the goods. They need to be clinical and professional in handling these revelations. It is imperative for the police to have the gumption to call a spade a spade.

They must rely only on ensuring that all the evidence available on those involved in the recordings are verified to be admissible before referring it to the attorney-general.
 
We must not dwell too long on the ethics of the matter and must set aside our procedural expectations and worry, so as to ensure that this time around, the message and not the messenger is the priority. It is never too late for justice to be done. – January 12, 2020.

* G. Selva reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.