KUALA LUMPUR – The prosecution’s reason for withdrawing all 29 corruption charges against former Felda board member Datuk Noor Ehsanuddin Mohd Harun Narrashid is unacceptable, and the action must be reversed, said the Centre to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Centre).
C4 Centre executive director Cynthia Gabriel told The Vibes that the excuse given by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission that Noor Ehsanuddin had repaid the money prior to the probe, with the key witness confirming that the money was a loan, is not acceptable.
Warning that this could set a bad precedent, she said regardless of the latest evidence obtained by MACC, it should be up to the judge to decide Noor Ehsanuddin’s innocence.
“Yes, definitely (the case should be decided in court).
“He took bribes, that’s a clear criminal offence. Why charge him in the first place then? The charge, under Section 165 of the Penal Code, is quite clear: any public servant obtaining any valuable thing, without consideration, from a person concerned in any proceeding or business, is guilty of an offence.”
Last week, Noor Ehsanuddin’s counsel Datuk Hasnal Rezuan Merican revealed that the prosecution withdrew all charges against his client on May 21, claiming that MACC was satisfied that the transactions involving him in relation to the charges were advances that had been fully repaid.
Yesterday, MACC issued a statement saying the withdrawal was based on facts confirmed by further investigations, explaining that the accused managed to prove that he repaid the money received, and that the key witness in the case confirmed that the funds were a loan.
“MACC referred the case back to the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) and decided not to proceed with the trial based on the latest development in the investigation. The decision was made because the testimony by the key witness was inconsistent.”
Noor Ehsanuddin’s charges include accepting bribes for instalment payments for his BMW 2 Series, cash, and a plot of land.
Cynthia described MACC’s explanation as “rather weird”, saying it does not make corruption okay even if the amount involved has been repaid – a sentiment shared by social media users, who condemned the decision.
“This can be very suspicious as it could be used as a ‘get out of jail free’ tactic. Basically, you are giving the message to corruption offenders that if you get investigated by MACC, make sure you prepare records that the bribe is a ‘loan’, and get the witness to affirm this and pay it back before the trial.”
‘Nothing MACC can do about the case’
Transparency International Malaysia president Muhammad Mohan, however, said MACC should not be blamed for withdrawing the charges, as this was done upon obtaining further proof and in consultation with AGC.
For MACC to continue pursuing the case, it has to make sure the case is “airtight”, he said.
“The key witness said the money was just a loan, and that the sum had been repaid. The fact that the witness was not consistent with earlier claims makes him not a credible witness for MACC. Because of that, I believe the AG, when consulted, would have said that the case would be a waste of time.
“In the rule of law, technically, you have to have a very strong case in order to prosecute. In this case, the key witness turned around. And if the AG doesn’t want to pursue the case, there is nothing MACC can do.”
Muhammad said Noor Ehsanuddin’s case is not too different from a graft case over a decade ago, in which he acted as a whistle-blower.
That case was lost at the Court of Appeal after the suspect produced an alibi that the money involved was a loan.
“We lost the case, although I know the person is corrupt. This case (involving Noor Ehsanuddin) is similar, in the sense that the key witness claimed the money was just a loan.” – The Vibes, September 6, 2021
.jpeg)
