From Bernama

July 11, 2007 20:16 PM

ACA Probe Against Johari Baharum Closed, Says A-G

PUTRAJAYA, July 11 (Bernama) -- Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail has ordered the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) investigation against Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Johari Baharum closed.

The decision was made as there was no statement to link Johari who was said to have received RM5 million for releasing several criminals detained under the Emergency Ordinance 1969, said an Attorney-General Department statement issued to BERNAMA here today.

Gani said the ACA opened five investigation papers after receiving information on the matter on March 5.

Statements were recorded from criminals detained under the ordinance and related statements of accounts were also scrutinised.

"For the three investigation papers, the ACA investigation found that the said criminals had denied giving Datuk Johari Baharum money as bribe.

"Two other investigation papers opened showed that several of the criminals who are important witnesses could not be traced after their release," said Gani.

The ACA investigation which was based on witnesses and documents found no statement that could link Johari to corruption.

"As such, the Attorney-General has ordered that the ACA investigation involving the five investigation papers opened against Datuk Johari Baharum be closed."

Gani said the ACA investigation took some time as statements of accounts had to be analysed and that statements had to be taken from relevant witnesses.

Tracing the witnesses also took some time while several could not be found.

Johari had denied claims that he was involved in corruption.

-- BERNAMA

Perhaps I'm ignorant about the system in Malaysia. Can the Attorney General authorise the closure of a case being investigated by the Anti Corruption Agency? As far as I'm concerned, the ACA is under the Prime Minister's Department and is answerable only to the Prime Minister. The AG should have no authority to close an investigation initiated by the ACA.

There has been an allegation the the Deputy Internal Security Minister had accepted bribes in return for the release of the criminals. So how can you absolve the alleged perpetrator, in this case the Minister, just because the alleged accomplices, in this case the criminals, denied any knowledge of bribing the minister? One does not need to be a detective to know that something is amiss here.

The AG's Chambers should issue a detailed report as to why they felt that the investigations should be closed. This report should be made public as this involves an elected representative in the ruling government. Any allegation of corruption should be thoroughly investigated. There should be no interferences, period.