“Whether it’s to discredit political foes or for vengeance’s sake, it’s Anwar’s responsibility to order probe on Tun M, Daim”
“It is not legally wrong for the PM to instruct the Police and MACC to investigate anyone as long as it was intended to look for evidence if a person has done something wrong or otherwise and to initiate appropriate action against him”
(Focus Malaysia) – PRIME Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim should be accorded benefit of doubt for ordering corruption probe on twice former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin for he did not have power in his hand to do so prior to assuming premiership.
This is because by serving his time in prison and being on the opposition side for most of the 25 years since he was ousted as deputy prime minister (DPM) in 1998, the police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) would have turned a blind eye to his complaints, according to former chief justice (CJ) Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad (2007-2008).
“It is not legally wrong for the PM to instruct the Police and MACC to investigate anyone as long as it was intended to look for evidence if a person has done something wrong or otherwise and to initiate appropriate action against him,” the 81-year-old Kepala Batas (Penang)-born Abdul Hamid penned in his blog.
“What is wrong is to fabricate false evidence to accuse someone. It doesn’t matter if the action is for his political gain as long as the information obtained is true. This is especially true if it involves losses amounting to billions of ringgit to the country. If I may add, this is the PM’s responsibility.”
Although Anwar deserves praises for being able to make them face justice, Abdul Hamid nevertheless reckoned that Anwar should issue a statement to clear the air that he was not involved in ordering the investigation on both Dr Mahathir and Daim if he indeed he did not direct a probe on the duo.
“So far, nobody is aware of the real matter. The police and MACC should also confirm it. They, too, need to explain why they waited until now to commence investigation or submit investigation papers to the Attorney-General (AG),” opined Abdul Hamid.
“If Anwar is involved in directing the police and MACC to revive the investigation and he is only able to do so after becoming PM, he should also say so. That is the best way for him to clear his name.”
As to how the public would perceive Anwar in light of his seemingly politically-motivated action, Abdul Hamid said they can be divided into two groups.
“The first group which believes in judicial independence will flatter Anwar as a champion of anti-corruption and anti-abuse of power and regard him as a saviour of the country,” suggested Abdul hamid who served as the Appeal Court president before his CJ appointment.
“The second group which doesn’t believe in judicial independence will see him (Anwar) as someone who is willing to use the police, MACC, prosecutors and court of law to imprison his political enemies to safeguard his position.
“Whatever their views are, what is important is that all parties carry out their duty in this matter honestly. By so doing, hopefully our political leaders will be cleaner in the future.”