A most embarrassing situation exist - Murray Hunter is facing a criminal charge of DEFAMATION in Thailand, initiated by MCMC - NOW, Bloomberg also allegedly defamed PM Anwar Ibrahim, MACC,... and the police/AGC decided 'NFA"(No further action) in Malaysia [same thing probably happened with Murray too] - so will Malaysia again look for a country that will charge Bloomberg for the crime of DEFAMATION?
Murray Hunter was detained by Thai police last week after a Malaysian institution[Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC)] - Malaysian initiated a defamation charge, and made a complaint across the border in Thailand, over his critical writing. - Diplomat, 6/10/2025
Mr Hunter, who was bailed and will appear in court again on November 17, had been charged with defamation over several posts critical of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) on his Substack. (He accused the Commission of abuse of power and its chairperson of a conflict of interest.) - ABC, 23/10/2025
OR NO - because it is BLOOMBERG - not some individual HR Defender like Murray?
The use of FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS and FOREIGN LAWS and FOREIGN CRIMINAL COURT is very wrong more so, when the complainant is GOVERNMENT or Government body like MACC or MCMC.
If anyone breaks Malaysian laws, like Defamation, - then, as a SOVEREIGN nation, we should only rely on MALAYSIAN laws, the Malaysian Administration of Justice, the Malaysian COURTS - and the using of foreign courts and foreign criminal law is SHAMEFUL - especially if it is GOVERNMENT of Malaysia who is the alleged victim of the CRIME?
Laws and legal standards in different countries are different... RESPECT our law and administration of justice mechanisms and courts...
Now, in the investigation of the presumably BLOOMBERG, the Malaysian law enforces and Public Prosecutor/Attorney General decided NFA - The case may have been the same with the Murray Hunter matter, as the MCMC also did file police report in Malaysia - BUT then to date, after more than a year, Murray Hunter, has seemingly not been charged in Malaysian Criminal Court...
The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has classified the police probe into a Bloomberg report last year alleging the prime minister had interfered in MACC affairs as “no further action” (NFA)...Bloomberg’s report also claimed that Anwar had ordered Azam not to investigate the prime minister’s former aide, Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak, over the latter’s purchase of shares in HeiTech Padu Bhd.The technology services provider is linked to the development of the government’s RM1 billion immigration system. - Malaysiakini, 5/11/2025
In my opinion, whenever any allegation or even an OPINION alleging a wrongdoing/crime on the part of the government, government agency or even PM Anwar Ibrahim - the FIRST things that should be done is to INDEPENDENTLY investigate the said 'allegations', which will also mean communicating with Bloomberg(or anyone else like MURRAY Hunter) to get more details, facts and/or evidence for the purposes on investigation. Did PM Anwar commit this wrong? Did MACC, MCMC, etc - commit this wrong?
IT''s a MESS - if Malaysia does not first INVESTIGATE the allegations/crimes of wrong doing by Ministers, Government Agencies, Public Officers > but rather FOCUS on the whistleblowers or media or others that 'EXPOSE' alleged wrongdoing - who get investigated for 'Criminal Defamation', etc ...
QUESTION - Did the AGC's decision relate to investigation/prosecution in the allegation of crime/wrongdoing of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's interference in MACC affairs? Rightly, the first thing that should have been investigated was the said allegation - and, after the said investigations reveals the TRUTH.
But, a further reading of the media report, it seems the Minister was talking about whether Bloomberg committed criminal defamation against the Prime Minister and MACC...NO - they are talking of the investigation of Anwar's or MACC's alleged wrongdoings - but BLOOMBERG.
“However, criminal cases, unlike civil cases, are not subject to a limitation period,” Azalina said in a written parliamentary reply yesterday in response to a query from PAS’ Besut MP Che Zulkifly Jusoh, referring to defamation under Section 499 of the Penal Code.
So, one wonders whether the Malaysian law enforcement and the Public Prosecutor/Attorney General ignores the allegations of wrongdoings of the Prime Minister, MACC or the MCMC (as was raised by MURRAY HUNTER) - THIS IS VERY WRONG.
Does Malaysia ASSUME that the Prime Minister, Minister, government bodies/department can do no wrong > hence the FOCUS is only on the 'whistleblowers' or those, including media, that raises such allegations of wrongdoings, abuse or 'crimes'.
BUT, is there also another PROBLEM - because such wrongdoings are still NOT specific CRIMES in Malaysian law, so difficult for even the Public Prosecutor to charge under any of currently available and existing CRIMES - should we enact specific CRIMES - Crime of ABUSE of Enforcement/Investigative/Prosecution Powers by MACC or MCMC - Crime for PM, Ministers or others who try to interfere with Enforcement/Investigative/Prosecution Powers of the said Commission(or law enforcement) - and this CRIMES should carry a DETERRENT sentence.
IF Anwar had ordered Azam not to investigate the prime minister’s former aide - is it a CRIME? What crime would that be? - or do we need to enact CLEAR CRIMES in relevant Acts - that will also criminalize 'wrongdoings'(including selective non-investigation/prosecution of certain crimes)..of even MACC or any government body, its Chief and Commission members.
This is something Malaysians, maybe through PARLIAMENT - should we criminalize actions of 'interference' of PM/Minister/Anyone in the independent operations of a government body?
Then, there is case of MURRAY HUNTER - he angered MCMC - accusing the agency and the police of being institutions that are politically influenced by the current government administration.... accused the commission of acting beyond its jurisdiction for personal interests, and claimed that the commission and the police were trying to scare the public.
Yesterday, the MCMC said it rejected all baseless accusations made by blogger, Murray Hunter, accusing the agency and the police of being institutions that are politically influenced by the current government administration.
The MCMC said Hunter’s postings were slanderous as he openly accused the commission of acting beyond its jurisdiction for personal interests, and claimed that the commission and the police were trying to scare the public. - Malay Mail/Yahoo News
Sec 34 [Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009] Influencing or attempting to influence the Commission
Any person who, otherwise than in the course of his duty, directly or indirectly by himself or by any other person in any manner whatsoever influences or attempts to influence any decision of the Commission or any member thereof commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both.
However, there is NO similar provisions apparent in the MALAYSIAN ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION ACT 2009 and/or MALAYSIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MULTIMEDIA COMMISSION ACT 1998 - which means it is now not a CRIME even if what Bloomberd alleged is TRUE - i.e. '...claimed that Anwar had ordered Azam not to investigate the prime minister’s former aide, Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak...' This must be REMEDIED by amendment.
The ACT of 'selective investigation or non investigation' OR 'selective prosecution or non-prosecution' should also be CRIMINALIZED with a deterrent penalty - if it is done by any officer, the Chief or member of the Commission, including the Commission itself.
What use if the law only provide procedures and principles to follow - but does not criminalize the failure to follow the Laws enacted by Parliament.
If it is NOT a crime - then, HOW can anyone that sees or knows of ALLEGED such wrongdoings even file REPORTS/COMPLAINTS about this to the relevant law enforcement.
Many people 'saw' or 'suspected' crimes committed by the POLICE - but they felt it was useless of making/lodging a complaint about police crimes/wrongdoings to the police itself - who was perceived unable to INDEPENDENTLY investigate and prosecute wrongdoers - and that is WHY we needed a separate INDEPENDENT entity to investigate complaints(and even have the power to PROSECUTE) like the IPCMC (Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission) but sadly this never became a reality - all we have now is a SORTING Commission - that sadly does not investigate on its own and prosecute on its own police officers > it just sorts and send it back to the police...NO USE.
So, who should we send COMPLAINTS/REPORTS about the alleged wrongdoings/'crimes' committed by MACC and MCMC? Back to MACC and MCMC - well, it will not work - most likely be 'covered up' and the persons/entities that HIGHLIGHTED this may be target ted...and even persecuted for crimes like DEFAMATION, etc..
As a lawyer, I have come across many clients who had been allegedly 'TORTURED' by police or even been allegedly asked 'BRIBES' by police - They have a right to make a police report - but realistically, many are of the opinion that it is no use - because not only 'nothing may happen' or worse there may be 'retaliation' for those who made a report against the police. One such victim, said that he was even 'threatened' that if he make a complaint/report against the police, he may be charged with the offence of making a 'false report' - now, since the majority of witnesses may be other police officers - people just have no confidence that any report to the police about police wrongdoings will work. Even if beaten and 'tortured' - many remand suspect are too fearful to inform Magistrate in remand proceedings - WHY? Afraid that they may be 'tortured' even more when they return to police custody.WHAT CAN WE DO WITH A PERSON'S PERCEPTION OR BELIEF?
This is the REALITY that need to be acknowledged - hence, for complaints about wrongdoings/'crimes' of the staff, Chief or members of the Commission, or the Commission itself - we NEED an INDEPENDENT body we can complain to - who will THEN professionally investigate and prosecute if we need to. LAW REFORMS here ...
Is HIGHLIGHTING publicly wrong? - well, the Malaysian people are the ultimate 'BOSSES' - so, is this also the proper avenue. The people also can bringing about changes in Law and Law Enforcement - and also cause a matter to be looked into - did '...the prime minister had interfered in MACC affairs...' did 'Anwar had ordered Azam not to investigate the prime minister’s former aide, Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak' (as highlighted by Bloomberg). The Malaysian public also can discuss whether this is WRONG or whether this should be made a CRIME?
Now, will Anwar Ibrahim, Azam Baki(the MACC Chief) and/or MACC itself, now that the police and the Public Prosecutor decided NFA, commence a CIVIL SUIT in Malaysia against BLOOMBERG on defamation - as was allegedly done by MCMC against Murray Hunter? Such Civil Suits can be commenced in Malaysia, US or ...
Bloomberg LP is an American privately held financial, software, data, and media company headquartered in Midtown Manhattan, New York City.
Will Anwar Ibrahim, Azam Baki(the MACC Chief) and/or MACC itself FILE a Judicial Review application in court challenging the 'NFA' decision of the Public Prosecutor/Attorney General and/or the police?
TWO options available here ....
OR....
See also earlier post:-
Murray-MCMC 'SCANDAL'??? -Miscommunication/Misrepresentation by Fahmi's Communication Ministry? Judgment in Default or Judgment after trial? TRUTH please
The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has classified the police probe into a Bloomberg report last year alleging the prime minister had interfered in MACC affairs as “no further action” (NFA).
Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said said the NFA directive from the AGC came after it determined that there was “insufficient evidence” to pursue charges.
“However, criminal cases, unlike civil cases, are not subject to a limitation period,” Azalina said in a written parliamentary reply yesterday in response to a query from PAS’ Besut MP Che Zulkifly Jusoh, referring to defamation under Section 499 of the Penal Code.
“Therefore, should there be any new developments in the future, further investigation and review of this case may still be carried out,” she added.
The minister noted that the police investigation paper was submitted to the AGC for further action following a report lodged by the MACC with the police.
Media Council
Azalina also said that the matter of such reporting can be referred to the Malaysian Media Council.
“The Malaysian Media Council Act 2025 was passed by Parliament and came into force on June 14.
“Therefore, any issues related to media reporting, including journalistic ethics, can be referred to the council as a monitoring body tasked with strengthening professionalism and accountability within the media industry in our country,” she added.
She further reiterated assurances that while the government remains determined to defend the public’s right to freedom of speech, as enshrined in the Federal Constitution, the right is not absolute.
Bloomberg report
In September last year, Bloomberg published a report, quoting sources, that implicated Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki in “concerted abuse of investigative powers” concerning supposedly targeted probes by the graftbusters.
The alleged political persecution was said to be focused on former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, whose widow, Na’imah Abdul Khalid, had lodged a police report against Anwar over the claims.
However, the police and the AGC have since classified Na’imah’s report as also NFA.
Bloomberg’s report also claimed that Anwar had ordered Azam not to investigate the prime minister’s former aide, Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak, over the latter’s purchase of shares in HeiTech Padu Bhd.
The technology services provider is linked to the development of the government’s RM1 billion immigration system. - Malaysiakini, 5/11/2025
Summary
Police and the AGC have deemed investigations into claims of political persecution involving Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and the MACC as NFA.
Lawyers for Daim Zainuddin’s widow, Na'imah Abdul Khalid, slam the decision as lacking transparency and accountability, calling it “outrageous”.
They question if key figures were even investigated, saying the case raises serious concerns over institutional independence and the rule of law.
Authorities have classified the investigations against Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim on the MACC's alleged political persecution of Daim Zainuddin as “no further action” (NFA).
Legal representatives for the former finance minister's widow, Na'imah Abdul Khalid, said they were informed of the NFA decision by the police and the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) via a letter from the Sentul district police chief on June 21.
"This decision is unacceptable, outrageous, and contrary to good governance and the rule of law," lawyers Rajesh Nagarajan and Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal said in a statement today.
"No details have been given of who was questioned, what steps were taken, or what the reasons were for the NFA.
"Was Anwar questioned? Was (MACC chief commissioner) Azam Baki questioned? Was the investigation fair, thorough, and impartial?" they asked.
On Sept 30 last year, Na'imah filed a police report following a Bloomberg news article implicating Anwar and Azam in "concerted abuse of investigative powers" concerning supposedly targeted probes by the graft busters into Daim.
Bloomberg’s Sept 26 report detailed claims of political interference in the graft buster’s operations.
The article also cited sources claiming that Anwar had ordered Azam Baki not to investigate the prime minister's former aide, Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak, over the latter’s purchase of shares in HeiTech Padu Bhd.
‘We will not be silenced’
Two days before her lawyers were informed of the NFA decision, Na'imah had filed a separate report with the Independent Police Conduct Commission, urging the commission to probe the force over its alleged inaction on her complaint.
Her lawyers said today that despite the serious public interest implications of Na'imah's allegations, the police and the AGC have chosen to "quietly close the case with no explanation and no accountability".
This decision, they said, reflects badly upon the police and the AGC, while also confirming the erosion of institutional independence under Anwar's administration.
"We will not be silenced or deflected from our pursuit of justice. The matter will be pursued until the truth is revealed and right is done.
"Malaysians deserve institutions that serve the public, not those in power," they stressed.- Malaysiakini, 23/6/2025
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment