- Malaysian boy on holiday killed in front of mother
- Six people killed in an accident at Kampung Pandan
- Indian national and teenage woman found murdered in apartment
- Waterspouts spotted off Lido Beach in Johor
- Six US soldiers killed in Afghan helicopter crash
- Malaysian sues U.S. govt
- Man high on wanted list shot dead by police
- Court dismisses defamation suit by Gardenia
- 'No jobs for medical grads next year'
- Property bubble: fact or fantasy?
- India diplomat says she faced cavity search in NYC
- Heavier prison sentence for policeman found guilty of incest
- Customs men among 11 held in raids
- Tourist distracted by Facebook falls off pier
- Actress Azean Irdawaty dies More
2009 PROBE: Statutory declaration cleared ex-DPM of allegedly stashing RM3b
PUTRAJAYA: A FORMER Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) official has shed light on why he drafted the statutory declaration clearing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim of allegedly stashing RM3 billion in foreign accounts and having links to Western interests.
Former ACA director of investigations Abdul Razak Idris claimed yesterday he was directed by the former deputy prime minister and finance minister to do so.
Speaking to the New Straits Times from Indonesia, Razak, who was involved in the 1999 investigations that were closed the following year, alleged that he was asked in 2009 by the ACA’s then chief, Datuk Seri Ahmad Said Hamdan, to stand in for the commission when the latter was subpoenaed by Anwar in a suit the opposition leader had initiated.
The ACA is the forebear of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.
In the 2003 suit against The New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd (NSTP) and its former group editor-in-chief, Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad, Anwar claimed that an article, titled “Anwar’s link to US lobbyist”, written by then NST managing editor Datin Rose Ismail and published on March 2, 2002, had defamed him.
Razak said Anwar had known that “there was no case” against him and that he had the upper hand in the case as all documents seized in the course of the investigations had been returned.
Razak, who left the service in 2004, said as he was subpoenaed as the plaintiff’s witness, he acceded to Anwar’s request to draw up the SD as he claimed Anwar had refused to put his statement down in an affidavit.
“He (Anwar) was afraid that I would turn hostile, so I was asked to make the SD and I tendered the SD when I was in the witness box.
“I was involved in the investigations, and in the course of the probe, so much was unearthed that by the time we were done, the investigation papers were about 1m high.
“Not having enough evidence to charge a person does not mean that the person being investigated is innocent. It can also mean that it is pointless to file charges as they will not stick in court.”
Commenting on Anwar using his SD to argue his case now, Razak said anyone in his position would do that.
Anwar’s media coordinator, Eekmal Ahmad, was surprised when asked to comment on Razak’s disclosure to the NST.
Eekmal asked how the NST had managed to contact Razak and whether any other media houses had similar details.
“We do not want to comment on this claim as we do not want to challenge Razak.
“For as long as the SD is not changed and Razak stands by the SD he made years ago, we don’t see any problem. An SD cannot be changed, otherwise Razak could be cited for perjury.”
To NST’s request that he ask Anwar to respond on the matter, Eekmal said: “If there is any response from Anwar, I will pass it to you immediately.”