CID chief giving up on his close to RM1 million is strange, says MP

Updated 6 years ago · Published on 4 Mar 2018 11:40PM · 5 Comments

Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng says he is shocked by the Home Affairs Ministry's explanation that Wan Ahmad Najmuddin Mohd was 'naive' about Australian laws. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, March 4, 2018.

BUKIT Aman Criminal Investigation Department chief Wan Ahmad Najmuddin Mohd should be able to easily get his close to RM1 million back from Australia by offering up a portion of it. 

“He should have no problems getting a lawyer if he offered them 50%, or more, of the A$320,000 (RM969,000) as legal fees, after the money is successfully retrieved,” DAP’s Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng said in a statement. 

“Is it because he has more money in other accounts overseas that the loss of A$320,000 will not jeopardise his children’s education?” 

Lim said he was “shocked” by Bukit Aman’s and the Home Affairs Ministry’s explanation that Wan Ahmad was absolved of any wrongdoing because he was “naive” about Australian laws.

“It seems like the Inspector-General of Police Mohamad Fuzi Harun has no choice but to accept whatever excuse is given,” Lim said. 

“It doesn’t matter that the police has failed to explain why Wan Ahmad had to go through a foreigner to carry out structured deposits of less than A$10,000 in several territories throughout Australia. 

“It also doesn’t seem to matter to the inspector-general that the money channelled by Wan Ahmad might have gotten mixed up with dirty money. 

“But what is strangest to me is that Wan Ahmad made no effort at all to retrieve his hard-earned money for his children’s education because he said ‘it was too expensive’.” 

Lim said that Wan Ahmad could have used the “No-Cure, No-Pay” legal service, where charges are only levied at clients after the money is retrieved. 

Malaysian police have stood by Wan Ahmad after his account was frozen and seized last Friday by the Australian authorities over money laundering suspicions.

Fuzi said Wan Ahmad’s money came from the sale of his house in Shah Alam, worth RM700,000. 

The IGP said Wan Ahmad had provided adequate justification for the need to acquire an overseas account for the sole purpose of funding his children’s education.

“It seems that people as ‘naive’ as Wan Ahmad now need to understand that Malaysian authorities can just accept the ignorance of the law as a valid reason,” Lim said.

“And the accused can now avoid prosecution by saying the he did not know that his actions had broken the law, including those of foreign countries.” – March 4, 2018.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.

Comments

  • What does MACC chief have to say about Malaysia CPI index now? If I were corrupt who got caught, I will sue the all the branches of govt they unqualified to catch catch, prosecute and judge me.

    Posted 6 years ago by Bigjoe Lam · Reply

  • Naive from a CID CHIEF! That's absurd as he's hiding something BIG here in fact all of the behind this are hiding the truth!!!! That's Malayland for you folks ...... if this was a non-Malay, you know what happens! Now it's not only being expose in Bolehland but even outside Bolehland, a Malay get immunity! That's how proud they feel about themselves.....LOL

    Posted 6 years ago by Crishan Veera · Reply

  • Remember the Menteri Besar that was caught with stacks of cash at the airport in Australia and the execuse "I no speak Inglish" that saved him.

    Posted 6 years ago by Akilis Aziz · Reply

  • A Malaysian CID chief can't afford to be naive about Australian laws. Especially when he is dealing in personal matters (as he claimed) with them. He could have carried out a little research and done it the Aussie way. I wonder if he is also naive about our laws?

    Posted 6 years ago by Chris Sav · Reply

  • If he were naive about Australian banking laws, why would he get someone to make the deposits in small amounts from various parts of the country? Doing so gives the lie to the "naive" excuse that came not from him but from those defending him.

    Posted 6 years ago by Ravinder Singh · Reply