KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 14 (Bernama) -- Firm action, including prosecution, must be taken against parties found to have committed offences related to Tabung Haji (TH) once sufficient evidence has been obtained, said lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla.
He said decisive action, regardless of the individuals’ positions, is crucial to ensure that the recommendations in the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) report on TH are translated into appropriate legal measures and to restore depositors’ confidence in the institution.
“Once an investigation is concluded and there is an official decision backed by sufficient evidence, criminal action must be taken immediately, regardless of who the individual is, to boost public confidence and bring the RCI recommendations to fruition.
“That is what the people want to see. The sooner we can resolve straightforward matters and bring them to court where there is sufficient evidence, the more public confidence will grow,” he told Bernama.
Mohamed Haniff Khatri, who was involved in the RCI proceedings, said, however, that prosecution in a particular case did not mean the entire investigation stemming from the RCI report had been concluded.
He said the government and authorities should provide updates in stages to ensure the public understands that prosecutions are being initiated based on completed aspects of the investigation where sufficient evidence had been obtained, while investigations into other matters remained ongoing.
“It must be made clear that the criminal investigation related to the RCI report is not yet over, as many other investigations are still underway. Therefore, public perception must be managed carefully so that, two years from now, people do not assume that bringing others to court is merely due to a change in government.
“Statements need to be issued step by step so the public understands that these actions are based on investigation findings and the evidence obtained,” he said.
The lawyer, who frequently handles criminal and civil cases, said the investigation into the RCI report is expected to take time as various aspects, including TH’s governance, investment dealings and potential legal violations, require thorough scrutiny.
He said that, based on information received, nearly 200 individuals had been summoned to provide statements to the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM) and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
“A criminal investigation cannot simply start today and conclude tomorrow. Therefore, the public needs to be patient. I foresee this matter likely dragging on for at least another three to six months,” he said.
He proposed that the Attorney General’s Chambers establish a special unit to oversee all investigation papers related to the TH RCI submitted by PDRM and MACC.
The unit, he said, should comprise three Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs) experienced in MACC cases and conventional criminal law to ensure that all investigation papers are evaluated in an integrated manner.
“This mechanism would make investigations more efficient, given that the TH RCI involves two law enforcement agencies with different procedures for handling investigation papers,” he said.
Mohamed Haniff Khatri’s views were echoed by former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Yaacob Md Sam, who stressed that the findings of an RCI could not, by themselves, form the basis for prosecution, as enforcement agencies must conduct further investigations to obtain testimony and evidence admissible in court.
Yaacob, who was directly involved as a conducting officer and secretary in several RCIs, including the inquiry into the collapsed jetty at the Sultan Abdul Halim Ferry Terminal in Butterworth, said RCI reports are not legally binding and cannot be used as evidence in criminal or civil proceedings under the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1950.
He said only evidence gathered by enforcement agencies through their own investigations could be presented in court.
“An RCI merely conducts an inquiry based on the terms of reference set by the government and makes findings and recommendations for further action. Consequently, authorities and law enforcement agencies must re-examine all evidence in detail to determine whether any criminal offences were committed by the parties involved,” he said.
Yaacob said all relevant aspects should be investigated by the authorities, particularly PDRM and MACC, to determine whether any offences warranting legal action had occurred.
“Once an investigation is concluded and there is an official decision backed by sufficient evidence, criminal action must be taken immediately, regardless of who the individual is, to boost public confidence and bring the RCI recommendations to fruition.
“That is what the people want to see. The sooner we can resolve straightforward matters and bring them to court where there is sufficient evidence, the more public confidence will grow,” he told Bernama.
Mohamed Haniff Khatri, who was involved in the RCI proceedings, said, however, that prosecution in a particular case did not mean the entire investigation stemming from the RCI report had been concluded.
He said the government and authorities should provide updates in stages to ensure the public understands that prosecutions are being initiated based on completed aspects of the investigation where sufficient evidence had been obtained, while investigations into other matters remained ongoing.
“It must be made clear that the criminal investigation related to the RCI report is not yet over, as many other investigations are still underway. Therefore, public perception must be managed carefully so that, two years from now, people do not assume that bringing others to court is merely due to a change in government.
“Statements need to be issued step by step so the public understands that these actions are based on investigation findings and the evidence obtained,” he said.
The lawyer, who frequently handles criminal and civil cases, said the investigation into the RCI report is expected to take time as various aspects, including TH’s governance, investment dealings and potential legal violations, require thorough scrutiny.
He said that, based on information received, nearly 200 individuals had been summoned to provide statements to the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM) and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
“A criminal investigation cannot simply start today and conclude tomorrow. Therefore, the public needs to be patient. I foresee this matter likely dragging on for at least another three to six months,” he said.
He proposed that the Attorney General’s Chambers establish a special unit to oversee all investigation papers related to the TH RCI submitted by PDRM and MACC.
The unit, he said, should comprise three Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs) experienced in MACC cases and conventional criminal law to ensure that all investigation papers are evaluated in an integrated manner.
“This mechanism would make investigations more efficient, given that the TH RCI involves two law enforcement agencies with different procedures for handling investigation papers,” he said.
Mohamed Haniff Khatri’s views were echoed by former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Yaacob Md Sam, who stressed that the findings of an RCI could not, by themselves, form the basis for prosecution, as enforcement agencies must conduct further investigations to obtain testimony and evidence admissible in court.
Yaacob, who was directly involved as a conducting officer and secretary in several RCIs, including the inquiry into the collapsed jetty at the Sultan Abdul Halim Ferry Terminal in Butterworth, said RCI reports are not legally binding and cannot be used as evidence in criminal or civil proceedings under the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1950.
He said only evidence gathered by enforcement agencies through their own investigations could be presented in court.
“An RCI merely conducts an inquiry based on the terms of reference set by the government and makes findings and recommendations for further action. Consequently, authorities and law enforcement agencies must re-examine all evidence in detail to determine whether any criminal offences were committed by the parties involved,” he said.
Yaacob said all relevant aspects should be investigated by the authorities, particularly PDRM and MACC, to determine whether any offences warranting legal action had occurred.