Malaysia's commitment to fight corruption via UNCAC
Since then, Malaysia has introduced significant reforms and implemented measures aligned with international standards as required by UNCAC.
Under UNCAC's implementation review mechanism, Malaysia completed two cycles of peer review. In the first cycle...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Free Malaysia Today
a day ago
- Free Malaysia Today
MACC probes tycoon allegedly linked to Albert Tei
On Monday, businessman Albert Tei claimed trial to two charges of giving a total of RM350,000 in bribes related to mineral prospecting licence applications in Sabah to two assemblymen. (Bernama pic) PETALING JAYA : The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission is investigating a tycoon allegedly linked to businessman Albert Tei, who is standing trial on charges of corruption. An MACC source said this followed claims that the tycoon, who manages a Singaporean company, had 'funded a corruption scandal' involving Tei and several Sabah Umno leaders. 'MACC has launched an investigation to confirm this information,' the source said. MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki confirmed the probe and said several witnesses would be summoned soon to assist in the investigation. On Monday, Tei claimed trial to two charges of giving a total of RM350,000 in bribes related to mineral prospecting licence applications in Sabah to two assemblymen. He is accused of giving RM150,000 and RM200,000 in bribes to assistant state industrial development and entrepreneurship minister Andi Suryady Bandy of Sabah Umno and Sindumin assemblyman Dr Yusof Yacob, respectively. The assemblymen also claimed trial to accepting the bribes. The Sabah mining scandal surfaced last year following the leak of several videos purportedly showing discussions involving bribery and misconduct related to mineral exploration projects in the state.
Malay Mail
a day ago
- Malay Mail
Malaysian tycoon Ong Beng Seng's guilty plea postponed in Iswaran graft case, pre-trial conference set for July 8
SINGAPORE, July 2 — Property tycoon Ong Beng Seng's guilty plea hearing has been postponed and replaced with a pre-trial conference scheduled for July 8, according to court records. According to The Straits Times, the 79-year-old was initially expected to plead guilty on July 3 to charges linked to former transport minister S Iswaran's corruption case. Ong faces two charges filed in October 2024, mirroring those for which Iswaran pleaded guilty in September last year. The Malaysian-born businessman is accused of abetting Iswaran in securing an all-expenses-paid trip to Doha in December 2022 worth approximately S$20,850, which included flights on Ong's private jet, accommodation at the Four Seasons Hotel Doha, and a business class return flight. A second charge alleges Ong abetted the obstruction of justice by helping Iswaran pay S$5,700 in May 2023 for a flight ticket, after anti-graft investigations had commenced. Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), where Ong served as managing director, previously said in a Singapore Exchange filing that Ong intended to plead guilty to obstructing justice and have the other charge considered during sentencing. Ong stepped down from his role at HPL on April 29, citing the need to focus on managing his medical condition. He is currently undergoing chemotherapy for bone marrow cancer and was previously granted permission to travel abroad for treatment. Iswaran, who was sentenced to 12 months' jail in October, began home detention on February 7 and has been out of prison custody since June 6.
Free Malaysia Today
a day ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Differing intentions in the Sabah mining fiasco?
From Amer Hamzah Arshad The Sabah mining fiasco has drawn public interest and sparked debates on corruption issues involving the role of alleged whistleblower Albert Tei, who is said to have given funds to several Sabah assemblymen, who in turn are said to have received the funds, believing them to be political donations. For the purposes of this discussion, it is important to note that Malaysia has yet to legislate any political financing law. The discussion on this fiasco has to be viewed and analysed against this background. As a starting point, it is instructive for us to appreciate that in all criminal cases, there are two main elements that have to be established in a court of law before one can be found guilty — 'actus reus' (guilty act) and 'mens rea' (guilty mind). These elements must also exist in a corruption case, and the interplay between these two is very crucial, particularly when the parties involved have differing understandings and intentions of the nature of the transactions. On the one hand, Tei claims that he should not be charged on the basis that he was a 'whistleblower', and on the other hand, the assemblymen maintain that the funds given were nothing more than political donations. There seems to be differing understandings and intentions between the giver and the recipients. While the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 criminalises both giving and receiving bribes, the important element that eventually has to be scrutinised is the intention of both parties, that is, whether there was corrupt intention in the transaction. In other words, what were the intentions of Tei and the assemblymen at the material point in time? If it can be shown from the evidence or even admissions in public domain (for example, through media reports) that Tei unilaterally intended to give the funds with the objective of securing mining licences, then it is open for one to conclude that he had corrupt intention when he provided the funds. For the assemblymen to be found liable, there needs to be a meeting of minds that the funds were for mining licences. They have made it clear that they were of the view the funds amounted to nothing more than political donations. Given the fact that there is no specific law governing politicians from receiving donations, they genuinely believe that they have not committed any wrongdoing. Additionally, the fact that the assemblymen were not part of Sabah Mineral Management Sdn Bhd, giving them no position or power to approve mining licence applications, among others, would be relevant circumstances to corroborate the recipients' defence. If the recipients genuinely believe the payment was a legitimate donation (without any expectation of a quid pro quo), this could negate their mens rea for corruption. Their defence would hinge on demonstrating that their beliefs were reasonable and held in good faith, with no awareness of the giver's corrupt intent. Ultimately, all the relevant facts and circumstances have to be analysed in order to determine the intentions of both parties. Having said that, if the recipients can establish they did not share Tei's intention, the latter's corrupt intent could still be established for offering and giving bribes. This is due to the fact that the giver's guilt depends on his own state of mind, not that of the recipients. Moving forward, in order to minimise, if not eliminate, this situation from recurring in the future, and to prevent unscrupulous individuals from taking advantage of donations they make to politicians, perhaps it is time for the various legislatures to seriously look into legislating a political financing law. Amer Hamzah Arshad is a lawyer and an FMT reader. The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.
