YESTERDAY’S acquittal and discharge relating to 29 bribery charges against a former Felda board member shocked citizens and civil society organisations, said president of Transparency International – Malaysia Muhammad Mohan.

The former board member went through the trial with 24 prosecution witnesses being called including bank officers and Companies Commission of Malaysia officials. However, from yesterday’s news, it was reported that MACC after studying the defence statement under Section 62 of the MACC Act, was satisfied that all transactions made as stated in the charges were advances that had been fully repaid. The question is why was this not looked into when the person was charged in the first place with 29 bribery charges. On the face of it, the mere fact that these were “advances” or “advances that have been repaid” does not make a transaction any less corrupt as originally alleged as “advances” are part of “gratification” under the MACC Act.

While we understand the technicalities involved in this case, however, it is important for MACC to clarify and explain to the public why it was necessary to withdraw the charges after studying the defence statement as this has raised a lot of questions among the public and also to avoid any trust deficit on MACC by the public. – September 2, 2021.

* Press statement from Transparency International – Malaysia.

* 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.