KUALA LUMPUR,May 23: A remand order and travel ban on Datin Seri Pamela Ling Yueh stood in contrast to her role as a witness for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), her family lawyer said on Friday.
MACC’s actions before Ling went missing were “clear intimidation and harassment”, as well as “an outright abuse of process”, considering that she was a cooperating witness, lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo said in a statement.
“The MACC did not just call Pamela, they hounded her,” Sangeet said. “She was in Malaysia on the orders of the MACC.”
The statement follows MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki’s assertion that Ling was not a suspect but a witness, and that the agency did not call her with the intent to arrest her.
Ling, a 42-year-old businesswoman, has been missing since she was seen abducted in broad daylight, while she was en route to the MACC office in Putrajaya. Her disappearance has since captured the public’s attention, as details of her abduction emerged.
Before Ling disapparead, the MACC had arrested, handcuffed, and kept her in a lockup overnight, before releasing her on a bail of RM35,000, with monthly reporting conditions and complete travel ban, according to Sangeet.
MACC themselves had applied and obtained a warrant of arrest on Dec 2, 2024 from the Johor Bahru Magistrates Court, before Ling’s detention, Sangeet said.
Ling was then served a notice under Section 72(3) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activity Act 2001 (AMLA), clearly stating that she had been arrested and produced before a magistrate, and was remanded for three days.
During this period, Ling was kept in MACC custody, questioned and had her phone seized, Sangeet said, noting that a request to go back to her children was denied, even when one of her children had been hospitalised.
“Azam should come clean about who ordered Pamela’s arrest and [on the] inexcusable treatment… instead of making statements which are shockingly untrue,” Sangeet said. “This is precisely the conduct which reinforces the lack of credibility of this public institution,” the lawyer added.
MACC’s actions before Ling went missing were “clear intimidation and harassment”, as well as “an outright abuse of process”, considering that she was a cooperating witness, lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo said in a statement.
“The MACC did not just call Pamela, they hounded her,” Sangeet said. “She was in Malaysia on the orders of the MACC.”
The statement follows MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki’s assertion that Ling was not a suspect but a witness, and that the agency did not call her with the intent to arrest her.
Ling, a 42-year-old businesswoman, has been missing since she was seen abducted in broad daylight, while she was en route to the MACC office in Putrajaya. Her disappearance has since captured the public’s attention, as details of her abduction emerged.
Before Ling disapparead, the MACC had arrested, handcuffed, and kept her in a lockup overnight, before releasing her on a bail of RM35,000, with monthly reporting conditions and complete travel ban, according to Sangeet.
MACC themselves had applied and obtained a warrant of arrest on Dec 2, 2024 from the Johor Bahru Magistrates Court, before Ling’s detention, Sangeet said.
Ling was then served a notice under Section 72(3) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activity Act 2001 (AMLA), clearly stating that she had been arrested and produced before a magistrate, and was remanded for three days.
During this period, Ling was kept in MACC custody, questioned and had her phone seized, Sangeet said, noting that a request to go back to her children was denied, even when one of her children had been hospitalised.
“Azam should come clean about who ordered Pamela’s arrest and [on the] inexcusable treatment… instead of making statements which are shockingly untrue,” Sangeet said. “This is precisely the conduct which reinforces the lack of credibility of this public institution,” the lawyer added.