YOURSAY ‘Mustafar Ali has forgotten to mention the RM42m from SRC.’
MACC: Not all donations are bribes
StraightTalk: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) need not offer some new definition for ‘donation’ and ‘bribe’. Allowing these terms to be discussed subjectively is dangerous and will not in any way help MACC to curb corruption in the country.
The agency should look at corruption cases objectively and just stick to what the law states and carry out its investigations in a transparent manner without fear or favour.
By the way, donations and bribes, including political funds, should not be compared to gifts received or exchanged at family functions as gifts received or exchanged at such functions or events are done above board. There is no secrecy about it and everyone in the family knows about it.
Anonymous #45527285: The people are not so stupid as to not being able to distinguish between gifts and corrupt money.
Mustafar Ali, as the MACC deputy commissioner, should not try to cloud the mind of the people by splitting hairs over the definition of ‘donation’.
Just carry on with your job as you are meant to do and take the necessary action if there is indeed any wrongdoing.
Res Ipsa: Mr MACC, please carry out and complete your investigations into the monies that went into the PM's bank account first.
I recall that the MACC had earlier concluded that the money was a donation and not from 1MDB. What is the basis of holding this view when in the next breath you mention that investigations are still ongoing?
After it was pointed out that even donations are within the ambit of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, you are now trying to come up with sub-interpretations of the word ‘donation’.
It is becoming pretty obvious that everything being said or done appears to be geared towards the protection of one man. Please try to be independent and complete your investigations swiftly instead of becoming a laughing stock by making such unnecessary statements.
Rick Teo: Mustafar has forgotten to mention the RM42 million transferred from SRC International, which was a subsidiary of 1MDB and later came under the purview of the Finance Ministry.
That money is from pension fund KWAP and cannot be called a donation. Its pure CBT (criminal breach of trust).
Why is MACC dragging its foot on this money transferred into Najib’s personal bank account?
Anonymous 2305141436452229: MACC seems to have been planning to interview the PM since forever.
How come the police have called in Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua twice already since July 1, but the PM who is at the centre of this entire scandal has yet to give a single statement to the police or MACC?
As Transparency International co-founder Michael Hershman said, it shouldn’t take so long to carry out the investigation. Just go to Najib and take a statement from him.
That should give you additional leads to further your investigation, and if necessary, go back to him for more questions.
SemoLina: MACC, stop referring to it as a donation. It is not a donation and never was. That you should even acknowledge it as one makes your integrity suspect.
I bet you in the end it will surface as money having been siphoned from 1MDB. The whole thing stinks to high heaven and I can't wait for what will be uncovered by the Swiss, United States, Singapore and Hong Kong authorities.
Basically: MACC men grilled former DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock till he apparently jumped out the window over a measly RM2,000 advance payment.
And yet you laboured to say the payment was 'problematic' although you have never explain what was problematic about a state executive councillor paying a contractor in advance to get the job done quickly.
So why make excuses now for Najib? Just do your job and probe the allegations. There are at least a number of problems with this 'donation':
1. Allegations of 1MDB link not fully probed.
2. The SRC portion of RM42 million going into Najib’s account. Was that also a donation?
3. According to former Umno leader Anina Saadudin, the RM2.6 billion was not reflected in the party books - this is clearly a major infringement. Even the party’s deputy president was kept in the dark about the money.
Why is there is no probe by the Registrar of Societies (ROS)?
4. The identity of the overly generous donor has been kept a secret.
Has it been established there is absolutely zero return to the donor for his gift? If you have not probed this till now, then please shut up and stop talking nonsense.
It's been over a month since The Wall Street Journal exposed the allegation. Since then all we have seen are moves to scuttle the probe, as if we are so stupid not to notice all the 'coincidental' promotions and transfers.
Hplooi: Of course, everyone knows not all donations are not bribes. Everyone donates to his or her favourite causes every now and then. But when a donation stretches belief, and it involves a very public figure, of course we demand explanation.
So when a full accounting of whether the said 'donations' involve criminal breach of trust is still very much wanting, why are you harping on "perception"? Not once but at least a few times.
We are beginning to think that perhaps MACC is starting Operation Whitewash.
Anonymous #523894157: This is a shocker coming from a MACC senior official. Some companies disallow their staff members from having a meal with their vendors because a meal is also a bribe in a small way.
What do you call RM2.6b ‘donation’ found in personal account?
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.
