KOTA KINABALU: The Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) and Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) must provide reasons behind the discontinuation of 146 money laundering charges against former Sabah Water Department deputy director Teo Chee Kong.
Teo was one of four key suspects involved in the "Sabah Water Department scandal", one of the biggest corruption cases in the country.
"It is a central tenet of the rule of law that there must be transparency in any decision making, which is crucial to building public trust and confidence," said Sabah Law Society (SLS) President Roger Chin.
He said in cases attracting high public interest where the charge strikes at the heart of faith in the administration and its governance, the AGC and/or competent authorities or relevant enforcement agencies including MACC must provide reasons to the public where it decides to discontinue to prosecute at any stage.
This is even more so when the very integrity of the institution making that decision itself is in the spotlight and under scrutiny due to a stock trading incident, he said.
"The AGC and/or MACC is obliged to explain to the public the reasons for the decision not to proceed with the charges (against Teo).
"Lack of information only fuels speculation amongst the public and (would) continue to encourage an international perception of rampant corruption in Malaysia," he said.
Chin in a statement noted that in 2021, Malaysia dropped five spots in the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (CPI) to 62nd position out of 180 countries in terms of public sector corruption. In 2020, the country ranked 57, while in 2019 it was placed at 51.
His statement today came after Teo was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) by the Special Court for Corruption here on Friday (Feb 18) following a request by the MACC prosecuting team which opted not to proceed with the case.
It was also reported that Teo was ordered to pay RM30 million compound as a form of punitive action and enable asset recovery of the lost funds.
According to Senior Director of the MACC Legal and Prosecution Division Datuk Faridz Abdul Abdullah, the issuance of the compound was under Section 92 (1) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLA) 2001.
He said SLS was aware of the provisions under Section 92 of AMLA which provides that the competent authority or relevant enforcement agency, as the case may be, may, with the consent of the Public Prosecutor, decide whether to compound a charge or not.
Chin, however, argued that as Malaysia fights to save its soul from the plague of corruption, the AGC and MACC must explain to the public how a person is charged for misappropriation involving RM32 million can obtain a discharge by paying an RM30 million compound and face no further consequences especially when the very availability of RM30 million to pay the compound itself lies at the very heart of the charges faced.
"If a good reason exists, transparency demands that this should be at the very least indicated to the public.
"Long gone are the days of a "father knows best" and "do as I say" without the need to explain."
Chin also highlighted that the Malaysian Bar had on the occasion of the Opening of the Legal year 2022 said that it would bode well for the AGC to provide reasons to the public when it decides to discontinue prosecution at any stage in cases of public interest, regardless of the personality.
Notwithstanding that the Federal Constitution under article 145(3) empowers the Attorney General with "wide discretion" to conduct, institute or discontinue any proceedings for a criminal offence, this discretion is not absolute and unfettered, he said.
"SLS wholeheartedly endorses this clarion call and further says that this principle should likewise apply to all competent authority or relevant enforcement agency prosecuting public interest cases."
Teo was charged under Sections 4 (1) (a) and 4 (1) (b), both of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001.
The first 78 charges accused Teo of possessing lands obtained from illegal activities through 78 transactions of transferring ownership worth RM12,705,203.70.
The other 68 counts accused Teo of possessing cash amounting to RM7,930,810.48 (RM5,952,050 and RM1,978,760.48 from foreign currency) and also cash of RM12,287,240.07 at financial institutions.
The charges stated that Teo had committed the alleged offences at separate locations at land district offices and bank branches here, in Penampang and Beaufort between 2005 and 2016.
Teo pleaded guilty to all charges on Dec 13, 2017.
On May 21, 2018, the court postponed the trial following Teo's application for a stay of the trial that had been granted by the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya on May 18, the same year until the disposal of appeals filed by him.
The prosecution had so far called five witnesses in the trial.
The other accused involved in the "Sabah Water Department scandal" are ex-director of Sabah State Water Department Ag Mohd Tahir Mohd Talib, Tahir's wife Fauziah Ag Piut, and Lim Lam Beng @ Lim Chee Hong.
Lim was the former deputy director of the department before Teo.
They had claimed trial to 37 counts of money laundering, involving more than RM61 million.