(Versi BM)

There is a simple test of comprehension in Malaysia today – how may Ministers agree with Azam Baki that the MACC Chief Commissioner has been declared innocent by the Securities Commission of committing any offence against the law?

If the majority of the Cabinet believes that the Securities Commission had not declared Azam Baki innocent but left the question open and unanswered as the Securities Commission is unable to “conclusively establish that a breach under section 25(4) of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 (SICDA) had occurred”, then only one option is open: the Cabinet and the least it should do is to ask Azam to go on leave as MACC Chief Commissioner until the question whether he had breached the law had been answered one way or another by other investigative agencies including the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department. Read the rest of this entry »

(Versi BM)

Has the Securities Commission made history by ending an investigation which will spark a thousand other investigations?

In declaring that the Securities Commission (SC) “is unable to conclusively establish that a breach under Section 25(4) of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 (SICDA) has occurred” with regard to the shareholding case of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Azam Baki, the Securities Commission has left open the question under what circumstances the SC will be able to “conclusively establish” whether SICDA has been breached or not. Read the rest of this entry »