Highway graft probe: 61 witnesses called up so far, says Azam Baki
MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki confirmed the matter and said all the witnesses in question had been called recently.
He said the amount of property seized involving a Tan Sri also remained the same as previously announced.
"I have given my officers a maximum of two months to complete the investigation papers for this case and I believe that the investigation papers will be completed in less than two months to be submitted to the DPP (Deputy Public Prosecutor)," he said.
Azam said this at a press conference after witnessing the handover ceremony of the new Kelantan MACC director Azmin Yusoff and the former director, Rosli Husain, here Thursday (July 3).
On May 29, various assets including luxury vehicles, jewellery, designer handbags and cash worth RM32mil were seized from a Tan Sri who is being investigated by the MACC over false claims and misuse of loan bonds for the construction of a highway in the Klang Valley.
According to sources, all the luxury items were seized by MACC Investigation Division investigating officers after raiding two of the Tan Sri's residences located in the capital.
The 18km MEX II Highway project began construction in 2016 and was supposed to be completed in December 2019.
It is planned to connect Putrajaya to the KL International Airport (KLIA).
Last month, Works Minister Alexander Nanta Linggi was reported to have said the government was working with all stakeholders to resolve the delay in MEX II, which was allegedly stalled due to financial problems. - Bernama
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Express
2 hours ago
- Daily Express
Abuse of position: Ex-assistant civil engineer to know fate August 20
Published on: Friday, July 04, 2025 Published on: Fri, Jul 04, 2025 By: Jo Ann Mool Text Size: The offence under Section 23(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 is punishable under Section 24 of the same Act, which provides for a jail term of up to 20 years,and a fine of not less than five times the amount involved or RM10,000, whichever is higher. Kota Kinabalu: A former assistant civil engineer, who appealed against the 12 months' jail sentence and RM20,000 fine on two counts for abusing his position in awarding a road maintenance project to his sister's company, will know the outcome of his appeal on Aug 20. High Court Judge Datuk Celestina Stuel Galid on Thursday fixed the date for appellant Herwan Malik after hearing his appeal against the Sessions Court's decision and submissions from the prosecution as the respondent. Advertisement Herwan, 40, who was challenging both his conviction and sentence, appealed to set aside the decision made by the trial judge. On Aug 29, 2023 he was convicted and sentenced to 12 months' jail and RM10,000 fine in default three months' jail on the first count for misusing his position as the committee member in making a decision on Kota Marudu District Office quotation to select Pemborong Sri Tassha which belonged to his sister Rozanah Malik, 32, to carry out the road maintenance project along Jalan Pertanian in Kg Sungai Laut, Kota Marudu. The offence took place between 8am and 5pm on Feb 28, 2013 at the Kota Marudu District Office. On the second count, Herwan was jailed another 12 months plus RM10,000 fine, or three months' jail for misusing his position to award the road maintenance project in Kg Pendawar, Kota Marudu, to the same company at the same place at 3pm on April 30, 2014. The offence under Section 23(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 is punishable under Section 24 of the same Act, which provides for a jail term of up to 20 years,and a fine of not less than five times the amount involved or RM10,000, whichever is higher. Herwan was ordered to serve the jail sentence concurrently but he managed to obtain a stay of execution pending an appeal to the High Court. Counsel Shahlan Jufri, representing the appellant, raised 10 grounds of appeal, which summarised that the trial judge failed to properly evaluate all the evidence adduced during the trial and did not fairly or justly assess the defence. He further argued that the Sessions Court judge erred in law and in fact by concluding that his defence was an afterthought, a bare denial, and a fabrication of evidence. He also claimed the judge failed to draw an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950 against the prosecution, and erred in finding that he had failed to rebut the presumption under Section 23(2) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act (MACC) 2009. Deputy Public Prosecutor Haresh Prakash Somiah urged the court to uphold the Sessions Court judge's findings and dismiss the appeal. He submitted that the evidence before the court had been tested for its truthfulness, and the credibility of all the respondent's witnesses remained intact and that the appellant's evidence, on the other hand, was shown to suffer from contradictions and bare denials. He further argued that the respondent had successfully proven his case beyond reasonable doubt and that there was reason for the court to interfere with the Sessions Court judge's findings. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
Malay Mail
3 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Why reasonable diligence? — Hafiz Hassan
JULY 4 — In the case of Datuk Seri Najib Razak v PP [2022] 5 MLJ 143, in his appeal to the Federal Court, former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak (appellant) applied for leave to adduce additional/further evidence to set aside his conviction and sentence on seven criminal charges. The purpose of the application was to show that the trial judge should not have presided over the trial since he was in a conflict of interest position. By his application, the appellant sought to introduce several documentary evidence as well as viva voce evidence of certain individuals, including officers from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). The appellant claimed that he had acquired the proposed additional evidence only in May and July of 2022, long after his trial was over, and that the evidence could not have been obtained at the trial even if reasonable diligence had been exercised. The appellant said he had satisfied the requirements for admission or adduction of the additional/further evidence. The Federal Court unanimously dismissed the application to adduce additional/further evidence. The apex court ruled, among others, that some of the additional evidence sought to be admitted/adduced was available at trial or, at the very least, could have been discovered or obtained by reasonable diligence. Attorney General of Malaysia, Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar, arrives at the Federal Court in Putrajaya. July 1, 2025 — Picture by Raymond Manuel Accordingly, the appellant had failed to satisfy the requirements for adduction of fresh evidence established by decided cases, in particular, in the English case of R v Parks [1961] 3 All ER 633 which the apex court had previously endorsed and applied. The slew of cases emphasised the point of 'availability' of the evidence and whether it was discoverable by reasonable diligence by the party seeking leave to adduce the additional/further evidence. The test is therefore one of availability. Some of the additional evidence was available to the appellant even if he was not served with the evidence. The Federal Court emphasised that the evidence could have been obtained by reasonable diligence. It was the apex court finding that the first requirement for adduction of fresh evidence had not been satisfied. The court referred to its own decision in the case of Lau Foo Sun v Government of Malaysia [1970] 2 MLJ 70 where an application to adduce additional evidence was dismissed solely on the ground that it could have been obtained by use of reasonable diligence. The above explains the forceful argument of Attorney General Tan Sri Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar that Datuk Seri Najib Razak did not exercise reasonable diligence to obtain a purported addendum or 'supplementary order' issued by the King for house arrest when the latter took the matter to court. Dusuki argued Najib had failed to demonstrate the supposed addendum could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence before a judicial review hearing at the High Court in July last year. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Malay Mail
3 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Azam Baki: No criminal elements in MyKiosk tender probe, to seek court order for RM170m asset forfeiture linked to Ismail Sabri
KOTA BARU, July 4 —There are no criminal elements in the investigation into allegations of corruption and misappropriation related to the MyKiosk construction tender by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (KPKT), said Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki. He said the MACC's current investigation revolves around governance issues. 'There has been a misunderstanding in the media suggesting we are investigating a criminal case. We have conducted a preliminary investigation and found no criminal elements, but we are now focusing on governance issues, if any, in order to provide recommendations to KPKT for improvement. However, the matter is not yet concluded,' he said. Azam said this at a press conference after witnessing the handover of duties between the new MACC Kelantan director Azmin Yusoff and his predecessor Rosli Husain here today. He added that the MACC took into account the report from MCA Youth as well as input received from KPKT itself, and the ministry had cooperated well in the investigation. Yesterday, the MACC began investigations into allegations of corruption and misappropriation involving the MyKiosk construction tender by KPKT. Meanwhile, commenting on the investigation involving former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob, Azam said the MACC would apply to the court to forfeit assets worth RM170 million that had been seized. 'If he (Ismail Sabri) challenges this in court, then the trial will proceed, and if the forfeiture is successful, the money will become government revenue. That is the decision made by the Public Prosecutor at this time,' he said. Previously, the former Prime Minister had been called in several times for statement recording sessions regarding the declaration of assets he made to the MACC under Section 36(1) of the MACC Act 2009. The Bera Member of Parliament is also being investigated for corruption and money laundering involving the expenditure and procurement of funds for the promotion and publicity of the Keluarga Malaysia programme during his tenure as Prime Minister from August 2021 to November 2022. The case is being investigated under the MACC Act 2009 and the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001. — Bernama
