KUALA LUMPUR (May 21): The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) could face further legal action, as it continues to stay silent over the disappearance of Datin Seri Pamela Ling Yueh, who has been missing for over a month now.
Ling’s family lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo, in a statement on Wednesday, said that questions still abound regarding the government agency’s investigations, which Ling was a part of.
“Did the MACC inform the police, in full and without delay, about the nature of its investigations? Who were they investigating? Who might have had a motive to silence [Ling] or prevent her from speaking further? If the MACC had reasons to believe she possessed sensitive or incriminating information, did they alert the police as to who [the] ‘interested parties’ may have been? If they did not, then the MACC must clarify why. Their withholding of critical information may have cost a life.
“The MACC and its chief continue to choose silence. Unless the MACC steps forward and accounts for its actions, there will be no alternative but for further legal action to be taken to compel answers.”
The police are currently investigating the 41-year-old’s disappearance, and the MACC has said that it will leave the police to carry out its duties.
It was reported last week that the police have recorded statements from 27 individuals. Police have also detained Ling’s estranged husband, Datuk Seri Thomas Hah Tiing Siu, but failed to get a court remand to detain him longer to assist with investigations.
Ling’s family has also contended that the MACC exerted pressure on her to resolve private disputes against Hah.
The MACC has said that the allegations of harassment were baseless, and procedures were adhered to, according to the law. MACC chief Tan Sri Azam Baki was also reported to have said that it was unfair to blame the agency, as Ling’s abduction took place on a public road, outside of MACC’s compound and beyond their control.
Sangeet’s statement on Wednesday comes on the heels of the court’s decision on Monday, where The Kuala Lumpur High Court granted leave (permission) to Ling’s legal bid to challenge an arrest warrant and travel restriction against her. The court was of the view that there were legal issues that needed to be ventilated.
Ling is looking to quash an arrest warrant issued by the Johor Bahru Magistrates’ Court on Dec 2 last year. She is also seeking a court declaration that MACC does not have powers to — directly or indirectly — prohibit someone from leaving the country, except for specific sections in the MACC Act 2009, and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLA).
The arrest warrant was sought by the MACC, after attending a meeting with Ling on Oct 29 last year. The meeting took place in offices of the Singaporean Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB), as Ling resides in the city-state.
According to court documents, Ling said she would cooperate with the MACC, but requested that any meeting take place in Singapore or remotely, as she had safety concerns due to private disputes against her estranged husband.
She then did not comply with an order to go to MACC’s office in Johor Bahru on Oct 30 last year, following which the warrant of arrest was issued.
Singapore authorities then handed Ling over to the MACC at the Immigration checkpoint. She was assisting with investigations here, and travel restrictions were also imposed on her before her disappearance.
The 41-year-old mother of three filed the leave application — against the MACC and the Immigration Department’s director general — on April 7, two days before her disappearance.
She went missing en route to the graft-busters’ headquarters in Putrajaya on April 9. She was summoned in relation to an investigation under the MACC Act and AMLA. Her case has grabbed headlines, with many voicing concerns over public safety and the MACC’s conduct.
Read also:
Missing Pamela Ling gets green light to proceed with legal challenge on arrest warrant and travel restriction
Police arrest husband of abducted Pamela Ling
Kidnapped Pamela Ling’s application for a judicial review against MACC money laundering probe provides some context but also raises more questions