The MACC has dismissed allegations that the anti-graft agency had abused its powers in its investigations against Muar lawmaker Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, July 19, 2022.登1登2登3皇冠（www.hg108.vip）实时更新发布最新最快最有效的登1登2登3代理网址,包括新2登1登2登3代理手机网址,新2登1登2登3代理备用网址,皇冠登1登2登3代理最新网址,新2登1登2登3代理足球网址,新2网址大全。
A MALAYSIAN Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Investigating officer told the Kuala Lumpur High Court today that the anti-graft agency did not abuse its powers in its investigations into Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman, in connection with his criminal breach of trust (CBT) and money laundering cases.
Muhamad Khairi Muhamad Rodi, 33, said that the investigation was carried out to find the source of the RM250,000 that was reported missing from Syed Saddiq’s residence, and to determine if there was an offence committed under the MACC Act 2009.
According to the 23rd prosecution witness, any complaints and information received by the MACC would be investigated first, and due to that, no specific section under the MACC Act was stated at the beginning of the complaint.
“I disagree that this investigation is to prosecute YB Syed Saddiq because whatever complaints and information are received, we would proceed with the investigation. Hence, there is no selective investigation to prosecute individuals in this case.
“I went to YB Syed Saddiq’s house to get documents or information that could help my investigation at that time,” he said during re-examination by deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin at the trial of the former youth and sports minister, who faces four charges related to CBT and money laundering.,
Khairi, who was investigating the loss of RM250,000, said that he and several MACC officers had gone to the politician’s house on March 31, 2020, at 5.45pm, to conduct an investigation, and at that time Syed Saddiq and his parents were at home.
Earlier, during cross-examination by lawyer Gobind Singh Deo who represented Syed Saddiq, the witness also denied that he had deliberately “cooked up a case” against Syed Saddiq when no case could be filed against the politician.
To the lawyer’s question, the witness said that the complaint against Syed Saddiq, under the MACC Act 2009, was general. However, the investigation led to section 27 of the MACC Act 2009 (relating to false reports).
“A total of three investigation papers were opened involving Syed Saddiq’s case, one of which (loss of RM250,000) was handled by me,” he said, adding that each investigation was done based on the instructions of senior officers.
Syed Saddiq, 29, was charged as the then Angkatan Bersatu Anak Muda (Armada) wing chief – entrusted with control of wing funds – with abetting Rafiq Hakim Razali, who was then the wing’s assistant treasurer, with CBT of RM1 million in funds belonging to the wing.