A case of he said, he said, he said


THE Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission said the settlement with former prime minister Najib Razak’s stepson Riza Aziz, who was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal by the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court, was agreed to by former attorney-general Tommy Thomas.

Within hours, Thomas denied that he had agreed with the decision to drop the money-laundering charges against Riza.

He said he was aware that Riza’s lawyers had made written representations to the Attorney-General’s Chambers regarding the case.

Such representations are usually made by lawyers on behalf of accused persons, and is a normal practice in most jurisdictions.

Thomas said: “I resigned 2½ months ago, and up to that point, there was no agreement to drop charges against Riza. So, it is wholly untrue and a fabrication to say I had agreed to the decision. I am terribly disappointed that MACC had to make this false statement.”

Hours after that, MACC chief Azam Baki defended the commission’s earlier statement.

So far, it’s a case of he said, he said.

But Azam, standing by his agency, said a deputy public prosecutor in the case had said Thomas agreed to the decision.

This is now a case of he said, he said, he said.

With the greatest respect, the MACC chief should not have said anything in the first place.

The withdrawal of a charge is the prerogative of the prosecution, as enshrined in Article 145(3) of the federal constitution.

MACC is an investigative body; it has no say in prosecution.

If a DPP had said Thomas agreed to the decision, let the DPP come out and say it. Firstly, he is the person authorised to say it. Secondly, saying what the DPP said is “hearsay”.

Curiously, the ad hoc prosecutor who applied for the withdrawal of the charge and a discharge not amounting to an acquittal, Gopal Sri Ram, has thus far not said anything on any agreement by Thomas. – May 15, 2020.

* Hafiz Hassan 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.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments


  • "But Azam, standing by his agency, said a deputy public prosecutor in the case had said Thomas agreed to the decision".
    How can Azam take the bare word of the DPP as the truth? Where is Tommy Thomas' written reply to the written representation made by Rizas lawyers to the Attorney-Generals Chambers regarding the case?
    On such an important matter there MUST be a written reply to that representation / or a written directive to someone regarding any action to be taken in response to the representation.
    So please don't pull a fast one on us Malaysians. This brings down the reputation of the MACC.
    Get that DPP to produce the Memo which directed or authorised him /her to drop the money-laundering charges against Riza. Or did the DPP "pandai-pandai" take it upon himself /herself to withdraw the charges?
    Mempertahankan dengan menunjukkan bukti hitam-putih dan bukan atas kata-kata kosong. Ini soal kredibiliti, soal MARUAH!

    Posted 4 years ago by Ravinder Singh · Reply