KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian-Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) has denied accusations that the agency had intimidated two lawyers performing their duties.
This follows Lawyers For Liberty (LFL) director Zaid Malek request for MACC to explain its conduct against lawyers Lai Chee Hoe and Irwin Lo for exercising their client's right to legal representation.
MACC in a statement said it received a complaint in late May 2024 from residents in an area in Damansara alleging that funds collected for management and maintenance by a joint management corporation were misappropriated.
Preliminary investigations found there was a basis for suspecting this, based on reports that the legal costs declared were not fully disclosed.
As a result, MACC launched an operation on June 4 and the suspect involved was detained and remanded for investigation, as they are one of the main suspects.
"The investigation focuses on the MACC Act 2009 (Section 31: Powers to Examine and Search and Seize) and breach of trust, not on obtaining information from clients.
Therefore, the issue of enforcement interference or intent to obstruct the public's right to legal representation, as claimed by LFL, does not arise," it said.
The MACC, however, did not address the conditions set against the detained lawyer to withdraw himself from representing his client.
Earlier today, LFL conducted a press conference to detail the lawyers' ordeal with Chee Ho and Irwin in attendance.
The two lawyers said they were questioned by the agency and told to provide documents related to their cases with the same client, which breached client-attorney privileges.
Chee Hoe was detained by the MACC after providing his statement over two strata management suits he is representing his client in High Court on June 4, and was later released two days (June 6) later on a RM20,000 bail.
"Upon my release, I was given three conditions: not to take action or attend a press conference against the MACC, not to appear as the chairman of the AGM for my client, and to withdraw from the suit, ceasing representation of my client," he said.
Similarly, Irwin, who represented the same client in the past but on a separate legal suit, was called by the MACC on June 5.
He said he did not know the nature of the matter and was only informed that he needed to provide a statement.
"I was questioned about my involvement with the client, including how I was charged, who appointed me, how much I was billed, and other details of the suit."