Is there really enough evidence to convict Muhyiddin in a court of law?

Has the MACC actually completed their investigation or is there some other timetable involved?

There is talk around some quarters the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) doesn’t have enough evidence to convict Bersatu president and former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin.

Just as an inter-departmental team was assembled after Pakatan Harapan’s unexpected electoral win in 2018 to investigate former prime minister Najib Razak over the 1MDB scandal, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission after Anwar’s appointment as prime minister has been investigating former prime minister, Muhyiddin Yassin, over the Jana Wibawa issue.

It took the PH government prosecutors almost one year to collect enough evidence to make a case against Najib. The prosecution for the Muhyiddin case apparently took just three months to collect enough evidence to lay charges against Muhyiddin. This is amazingly quick in a case allegedly involving RM 232 million.

While in court on Friday morning, Muhyiddin claimed trial to four counts of abuse of power and two counts of money laundering.

Muhyiddin is accused of receiving RM 120 million in illicit funds from Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, from February 25, 2001 to July 8, 2022. The money laundering was allegedly committed by depositing funds into Bersatu’s bank account.

Syed Mokhtar Shah Syed Nor and his wife Sharifah Zarah Kechik are both the shareholders and directors of Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd.

The unanswered question is why is Muhyiddin facing charges alone, and not along side the directors and shareholders of Bukhary Equity? Did the directors do a deal and turn state’s witnesses for the prosecution?

In an unrelated matter Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, just agreed with prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, not participate in the Kulim International Airport development. It is expected Syed Mokhtar will be much be very active with the Anwar administration over the coming months.

On Monday, Muhyiddin is expected to be charged again at the Shah Alam Court Complex. Muhyiddin was first called into the head office of the MACC on Thursday and arrested an hour later, released to appear in Kuala Lumpur High Court on Friday morning.

Last night, after released from custody from the MACC headquarters in Putra Jaya, Muhyiddin claimed that all government expenditure related to the Jana Wibawa scheme was under the direct control of the Finance Ministry. Thus, Finance Minister Tengku Zafrul Tengku Aziz was the person responsible for decisions on the matter. Under these arrangements Muhyiddin claimed he had no authority over those funds. Muhyiddin also claimed he did not personally approve the tax exemption sort by Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary for his foundation.

Syed Mohktar, moving camp again?

Muhyiddin himself has said the MACC has charged him even before they have completed their investigations.

This is consistent to what some are saying.

Muhyiddin and other Bersatu leaders are claiming the charges are politically motivated with the coming state elections in mind. As a consequence, the MACC has been weaponized, as it has been in the past. The arrest and charging of Muhyiddin, and Wan Saiful Wan Jan, and Adam Radlam Adam Muhammad before him, appear to be uniting Bersatu, rather that dividing the party as some strategists had expected.

Hot reports around Putra Jaya

However, there are reports among some in the know around Putra Jaya that the MACC doesn’t believe they have enough evidence to make a case strong enough to convict Muhyiddin in a court of law.

This is not to say Muhyiddin is innocent, or guilty for that matter. Simply there is as yet, not enough evidence to act upon, and convict Muhyiddin.

Topsy-Turvy legal system

Some within the legal community are saying the outcome of ‘big’ court cases are now becoming more difficult to predict. Only a week or so ago, presently jailed Najib Razak and his co-defendant former CEO of 1MDB, Arul Kanda Kardasamy, were acquitted of charges of tampering with the 1MDB audit reports. High Court Judge Muhamed Zaini presiding over the case ruled the state prosecutors failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove any case that Najib and Arul had tampered with the audit reports of 1MDB.

Some lawyers around KL who don’t want to be quoted believe the upcoming case of deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi will have a similar result.

The optics don’t look good.

Subscribe Below: