Many former UMNO-BN MPs and politicians have jumped over to support or become members of PH after the last General Elections? Will that save them from being investigated, charged and properly tried for whatever crimes?
As we observe the current PH government charging ex-Prime Minister, former Ministers, others ...one wonders whether there is any 'special consideration' for those MPs, politicians and others ...who have now 'joined' one of the Pakatan Harapan parties ...or are now 'government friendly ' MPs after they left their former BN parties? Has there been even one such person now facing charges in court....maybe, it will happen in the near future...
When it was reported that several BN MPs, including Hishammuddin Hussein, recently met the Economic Affairs Minister - where the real purpose or what transpired still is rather vague ... One may be concerned that some 'deal' is being worked out which may end with the said former Defence Minister maybe not being charged in court ...or poorly prosecuted ...resulting in finally an acquittal > something that has happened before in cases like Kasitah Kadam and Eric Chia - both acquittal by reason of failing to call material witness?
So, are DEALS being made not to charge certain politicians and persons? OR maybe to charge but be assured that you will not be convicted but be acquitted?Remember Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam - both were acquitted because prosecution failed to call material witnesses.The Eric Chia case...In his 30-page oral judgment, he went on to fault the prosecution in every aspect of the case, from the way the main charge and alternative charge were proffered right to the tendering of documents, and its failure to call crucial witnesses.Akhtar said the most glaring setback was the prosecution’s failure to call two material witnesses, who would have been able to confirm whether payment was needed for the technical assistance agreements (TAA) signed between Perwaja Rolling Mill Development and NKK Corporation.He said former Perwaja company secretary R.R. Durai Rajasingam, who was involved in all Perwaja’s contracts, would have known the actual contents of the TAA.“Yet the prosecution never called him. The question is why? I see nothing to say that he would be a hostile witness or give evidence against them.”The judge also questioned the prosecution’s reluctance to call the five Japanese witnesses, including NKK Corporation, Japan, director N. Otani, who was present at the signing of the TAA in Japan in 1993.“I wonder whether it was the Japanese witnesses who were reluctant or the prosecution was the one reluctant to bring them here,” he said.Akhtar also said the prosecution’s contention that the TAA was free fell flat in its face when tendering its documents at the trial as they clearly stated that the agreements would be effective upon receiving first payment.Another document by NKK Corporation not only requested for the payment to be in a lump sum but also stated the amount.Now, see the similarities in the Kasitah Gaddam's case...He said the prosecution failed to lead any evidence to show fabrication of that document, which it contended.- Star, 27/6/2007, Eric Chia acquitted of CBTFormer land and cooperative development minister Tan Sri Kasitah Gaddam was acquitted and discharged by the High Court here of committing corrupt practice and cheating involving shares belonging to the Sabah Land Development Board (SLDB) in 1996.Judge Justice Suraya Othman ruled that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case on both charges for the court to call Kasitah to enter his defence.“The essential ingredients of both the offences of corrupt practice and cheating were not made out on the facts before the court. In the circumstances, the accused stands acquitted and discharged of both the charges against him,” Suraya said in her 74-page judgment.Kasitah, 62, was the first Cabinet member to be charged with such crimes.....,,,,Kasitah had claimed trial to using his position as SLDB chairman for his financial gain by taking part in the decision to approve a proposal to sell 16.8 million shares held by the board in Sapi Plantations Sdn Bhd to Briskmark Enterprise Sdn Bhd, where he was promised 3.36 million shares in Sapi Plantations on Oct 22, 1996.On the second charge, Kasitah was alleged to have cheated the SLDB board members by omitting to disclose the offer by PPB Oil Palms Sdn Bhd to allocate five shares of the company for each share of Sapi Plantations in the proposal by company for listing on the KLSE.He thereby dishonestly induced them to approve the sale of 16.8 million shares held by SLDB in Sapi Plantations to Briskmark Enterprise whereas they would not have approved the sale if they had known about the offer by PPB Oil Palms.Justice Suraya said the failure of the prosecution in not calling six board members who were present in the meeting was detrimental to the case as it had created a big gap over the question of whether the board members were actually cheated by the accused.She also said that evidence by lawyer cum board member Catherine Yong was very damaging as she did not indicate that Kasitah had misused his position or influence her or other board members during the meeting.Besides that, the judge said there was no element of inducement on the part of Kasitah to the board members.- Star, 13/8/2009, Kasitah freed of corruption chargesWhen you do not have sufficient evidence and necessary witnesses, you must never charge a person in court. And, if you fail to convict, then it is time for Malaysia a law that requires the government to pay COMPENSATION to accussed persons - to compensate their loss of liberty, their costs, etc...When it comes to material witnesses, it is normal practice to first record a statement by the witness usually under oath - so, even if there is a sudden change of testimony when he is called, that witness can be challenged with reference to the earlier statements given. Such witnesses could also be charged in court...Witness can be summoned through the issuance of subpoenas (court orders) and a failure to comply with the said order can give rise to contempt proceedings taken against such witnesses...So, why was there a failure to call material witnesses? Was there some order...or some other intervening factor at play that wanted the said accused persons acquitted? Or was it just incompetence, negligence or inexperience on the part of the assigned prosecutors? All we can do is speculate...- Najib's and BN's commitment to anti-corruption question - looking back at Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam's judgmentsSee also earlier post:Kasitah Gaddam & Eric Chia - Prosecution's failure to call witnesses - Was it just incompetence OR....?
Reports have emerged that Mr Azmin Ali, deputy president of PH component party Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), had a meeting with 22 opposition Umno and five PKR MPs on Monday evening. Mr Azmin, who is also economic affairs minister, downplayed the meeting, the Malay Mail reported.
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 23 — 15 Umno MPs including former vice president Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Hussein have denied discussing plans to defect from the party following their meeting with a Cabinet minister on Monday.They issued a statement similar to seven MPs last night disputing claims by Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad that the MPs met with Economic Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali because they are “lost” and are in need of a new political party.
When Muhyiddin or Anwar or Azmin or Mahathir or some current PH party member, formerly a leader/Minister of the past BN regime gets investigated, charged and prosecuted - for corruption, abuse of power, etc ... then we will all be convinced that the AG, police, MACC is truly independent and no 'preferential treatment' for those who are now PH government leaders?
Patriot ups pressure on Hisham over helicopter purchase
PETALING JAYA: Veterans group National Patriots Association (Patriot)
has urged former defence minister Hishammuddin Hussein to take
responsibility over the non-delivery of six helicopters worth RM300
million despite about one-third of the payment made, some five months
after a report was lodged with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission
(MACC) to investigate the deal.
“Since the contract was sealed by the previous government, it is
imperative for the previous defence minister and all officials
associated with the procurement to assume responsibility for the
dereliction of duty,” said Patriot president Arshad Raji.
The group said it was baffled with the speed with which the contract
was completed — in 18 months with delivery expected in less than two
years.
“It would appear that this was an off-the-shelf procurement where the
six helicopters were all lined up to be sold. This procurement has been
flawed from the outset,” Arshad said.
On Friday, Defence Minister Mohamad Sabu said the government may go to court if the six helicopters were still not delivered.
The defence ministry had lodged a report with MACC in June. There has been no word on the status of the investigation.
This followed a revelation by FMT in May that the six McDonnell
Douglas MD530 lightweight combat helicopters had not been delivered,
after being purchased through an agent linked to a senior defence
ministry official.
The company’s dealership rights were however terminated by the US manufacturer, MD Helicopters.
It was revealed that RM112.65 million had been paid in advance.
Arshad asked if the army really needed the six helicopters and whether there was logistic support to maintain it.
“Action must be taken against wrongdoers no matter how high their
positions are, including those who have retired from the civil service
and from the military,” he said. - FMT, 2/11/2019
No comments:
Post a Comment