Can SC and MACC conduct impartial probes into each other?

Question

Accepted Answer

Impartiality of SC and MACC Investigations Questioned Amidst Top Official Misconduct Allegations

Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo has raised significant concerns regarding the impartiality of investigations where the Securities Commission of Malaysia (SC) and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) are examining each other's top officials. The effectiveness of such self-investigative measures is being directly questioned, particularly in light of admissions of proxy share trading by MACC chief Tan Sri Azam Baki and reports of alleged misconduct involving SC board members. These circumstances have led to doubts about potential conflicts of interest and the ability of these bodies to conduct unbiased inquiries.
Attorney General's Role in Overseeing Investigations

The effectiveness of the SC and MACC investigating each other has been directly challenged by Gobind Singh Deo, who has formally sought an explanation from Attorney General Tan Sri Idrus Harun. The core of the concern lies in whether the Attorney General believes these investigations can proceed without the appearance or reality of compromise, given the positions held by the individuals under scrutiny. The Attorney General's office typically plays a crucial oversight role in matters of public interest and legal proceedings, making its stance on this particular arrangement highly significant.
Allegations Against MACC Chief and SC's Response

The current situation stems from MACC chief Tan Sri Azam Baki's admission on January 5 that his brother, Nasir Baki, had used his (Azam's) share trading account to purchase shares in two public-listed companies in 2015. Following this admission, the SC announced its intention to question Azam Baki. This action is based on potential violations of stock trading laws, specifically citing Section 25 of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act (SICDA), which mandates that securities accounts must be held under the name of the beneficial owner or an authorised nominee.
MACC's Investigation into SC Board Members

In parallel to the SC's action concerning Azam Baki, the MACC is also reportedly investigating complaints lodged against members of the SC's board of directors. These complaints pertain to alleged misconduct among the board members themselves. The dual nature of these investigations, with each agency probing the other's senior leadership, amplifies the concerns about potential conflicts of interest and the perceived impartiality of the entire process.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Can SC and MACC conduct impartial probes into each other?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends