The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) director of investigations has suggested that all investigations involving politics be suspended temporarily with immediate effect.
In a fit of frustration, Mohd Shukri Abdull said he felt that certain quarters were out to tarnish MACC’s image by making vicious and unfounded allegations against the commission, especially against his officers. His statement was clearly directed at PR leaders and supporters.
I would like to point out to Shukri an example which merits a call for the MACC to act without fear or favour.
Why was Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd CEO Tiong King Sing allowed to have his lawyers present when he was quizzed in his office BUT not DAP political aide Wong Chuan How?
Why was Wong not allowed to be questioned in his office although it was earlier agreed?
We are clear about the allegations against Kuala Dimensi but what was Wong's offence?
Why were the two, Tiong and Wong, treated very differently?
Why is it so difficult for MACC officers to follow standard interrogation procedures?
MACC directors should try to answer these questions before accusing others of attempting to tarnish their image. The damage is of their own doing.
Why the ICAC Hong Kong was able to achieve more than 90% confidence rating from the public and not the MACC, although the latter claimed to have adopted its operating model?
MACC deputy chief commissioner Abu Kassim Mohamed should also try to understand the public's frustration with his agency and the level of corruption in this country.