Two women suspects in Kim Jong-nam assassination remanded for seven days
KUALA LUMPUR: Two women arrested in connected with the assassination of Kim Jong-nam, the half-brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, have been remanded for seven days.
Selangor police chief Comm Datuk Seri Abdul Samah Mat said the two women have been remanded until Feb 21 to assist in the investigations.
One of the women has a Vietnam passport bearing the name Doan Thi Huong while the other has an Indonesian passport bearing the name Siti Aishah.
“They have been remanded. So far, there is no press conference as a press statement have been issued. We will update if there is anymore development,” Abdul Samah told The Star Online.
At 11.05am, Magistrate Sharifah Muhaymin Abd Khalib was at the Sepang police headquarters to grant the police’s application to remand the woman with the Vietnam passport.
Jong-nam, 45, was killed by two women who splashed his face with a chemical at the KLIA2 departure hall at about 9am on Monday. He was about to leave for Macau.
The women later got into a taxi and fled.
One of the women, who has the Vietnam passport, was arrested at the airport on Wednesday when she tried to board a flight out.
The woman with the Indonesian passport was arrested at 2am on Thursday.
Police are looking for four men who were in the company of the two women at the airport when Jong-nam was killed.
By Farik Zolkepli and Joash Ee De Silva The Star/|ANN
Trump-tanic by Stephff | China
Court to rule on ‘violation’ motion ahead of CM corruption trial
GEORGE TOWN: The High Court here will rule on March 7 whether Section 62 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 is in violation of the Federal Constitution.
Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and businesswoman Phang Li Khoon want Section 62 to be declared unconstitutional as they claim it is against the tenet of “considered innocent unless proven guilty.”
Penang High Court judge Datuk Hadhariah Syed Ismail set the date after the defence and prosecution made their arguments.
Lim and Phang are facing charges under the MACC Act in relation to the sale and purchase of a bungalow in 2014 and separately filed the motion to declare Section 62 a violation of the Federal Constitution in early January.
Phang’s counsel Datuk V. Sithambaram said Section 62 must be struck down as “it is contrary to a right to fair trial and is in violation of the fundamental rights of the accused.”
He argued that the section infringes the accused’s constitutional right under Article 5(1) and Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution.
“Section 62 of the MACC Act requires the defence’s statement and documents, which would be tendered as evidence, to be delivered to the prosecution before the start of trial.
“However, the right of an accused to be presumed innocent and right to silence are encapsulated in the Federal Constitution.
“Article 5(1) declares that no person shall be deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law and Article 8(1) dictates that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.
“The court has not called for defence and yet the prosecution is asking for the statement of defence, even before the court decides. This is against the presumption of innocence,” he told the court yesterday.
Gobind Singh, acting for Lim, said the provision favours the prosecution and discriminates against the rights of the accused.
He argued that Section 62 restricted the defence of the accused person by excluding the right of an accused to expand his defence further and produce further documents at the trial.
“It is against the provisions of equality under Article 8 of the Federal Constitution.
He also said the accused could be subjected to criminal consequences under Section 68 of the MACC Act for failing to comply with the Act’s provisions and be penalised under Section 69 of the MACC Act.
DPP Masri Mohd Daud said Section 62 of the MACC Act is not discriminatory and is procedural and a general provision.
“The Act does not stop the defence from making further submissions other than those which had been submitted,” said Masry.
“The arguments that Section 62 contradicts Article 5 of the Con-stitution is far-fetched! Article 5 refers to, among others, the rights to consult a lawyer and the rights to be informed of the grounds for an arrest.”
On June 30, last year, Lim was charged with obtaining gratification for himself and his wife Betty Chew by approving the conversion of two lots of agricultural land belonging to Magnificent Emblem into residential development while chairing a state Planning Committee meeting on July 18, 2014.
The offence under Section 23 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act, carries a jail term of up to 20 years and a fine of at least five times the value of gratification or RM10,000, whichever is higher.
He faces another charge under Section 165 of the Penal Code for using his position to obtain gratification by purchasing his bungalow in Pinhorn Road from Phang at RM2.8mil, below the market value of RM4.27mil, on July 28, 2015. The offence is punishable by a maximum of two years in jail or a fine, or both.
Phang, who is charged with abetment, faces up to two years in jail or a fine, or both.
Both Lim and Phang have pleaded not guilty. Their cases will be jointly heard between March and July.
Phang is respresented by Sithambaram, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik and A. Ruebankumar, while Lim by Gobind, Ramkarpal Singh Deo, R.S.N Rayer and Terence Naidu.
By Chong Kah Yuan The Star/Asia News Network
The ACT 694 under the Law of Malaysia, which is also the Malaysian Anti–Corruption Commission Act 2009, received the Royal Assent, gazetted and enforced …
Jul 3, 2016 … Critical time for DAP leader, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng. Fall from grace: Lim, who is facing two charges of corruption alongside …
Ministers may face conflict of interest, says Tunku Abdul Aziz: “If you have no power, you cannot abuse it. Civil servants hav…
https://youtu.be/M4urYR-7-8A PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has launched an investigation into the
Sitting in the lap of luxury: A Mercedes Benz belonging to one of the suspects Five people, including two former
RM2bil recovered from audits The Government seldom receives dividends and whenever loans are given to these GLCs, they keep piling up&…
MACC deputy chief commissioner (prevention) Datuk Shamshun Baharin Mohd Jamil MACC reveals ‘worrying statistics’ KUALA LUMPUR…
United against corruption for development, peace and security Aerial group photo of staff in Geneva simulating the Sustainable Developme…
Stepping down: Dr Lim giving a speech at the council meeting at City Hall, Penang. Dr. Lim tells why he walked GEORGE TOWN: The only
THE beginning of the year is as good a time as any to reflect upon the direction the country is heading towards.
Ten years ago, Malaysians were just beginning to appreciate the opening up of public space. Then prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, or more familiarly known as Pak Lah, had taken over in 2003, and then won a landslide victory for the ruling Barisan Nasional in 2004, riding on a wave of public confidence in his commitment to reforming a government that had lost a whopping 14 parliamentary seats in the previous 1999 general election.
What was most distinct about his administration was his promise to clamp down on corruption and therefore empowering the anti-corruption agencies. Related to this was the general change in the sociopolitical air – civil society felt freer and more able to organise public seminars related to various issues previously deemed sensitive.
More significantly, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was established in 2004, an upgraded version of the previously known Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), with the idea of being a regional hub for anti-corruption capacity and capability building to “fight corruption by promoting best practices in investigation, monitoring and enforcement …”
Modelled after Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), it was meant to be a more robust agency now given greater teeth to fight graft in the country.
The MACC did go through significant challenges, chief of which was the incident in 2006 during which political aide Teoh Beng Hock was found to have fallen to his death at the MACC Selangor headquarters in Shah Alam. Embroiled in controversy, the investigations and court cases eventually concluded that it was, in fact, a homicide that took place. Although the police did not eventually find the perpetrator, the MACC as an institution did take measures to improve itself after admitting there were flaws in its system.
One of the reform measures was to set up five independent committees, namely the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Special Committee on Corruption, the Complaints Committee, the Operations Evaluation Panel, and the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel. These committees would be tasked to provide oversight to the operations and investigation processes of the MACC, and many individuals of good public standing were appointed to fill these positions subsequently, although these mechanisms did not sufficiently boost public confidence.
Over the last year, the MACC has been in the spotlight for numerous reasons, having investigated 1MDB and other cases related to it, but then later raided by the police for reportedly having leaked documents.
Has the anti-corruption commission that was initially promised to be reformed and strengthened all those years ago instead been eroded and weakened?
The MACC in fact ought to be an independent institution given the resources to fight corruption. But the 2017 budget saw a laundry list of financial cuts, including in investigation and surveillance, law and prosecution, prevention, administrative and forensic services, as well as record and information management, and community education. How is it possible for the MACC to continue functioning with the same expectations but with a much lower budget?
One of the core reforms that some of us in civil society have called for in recent years is an independent MACC that reports to Parliament and has greater autonomy both financially and in hiring and firing its own staff.
The MACC currently reports to the Prime Minister’s Department, which surely is a source of potential conflict of interest. Having a truly independent MACC would allow it to truly exercise its duties in an unbiased fashion without fear or favour.
The new MACC Chief Commissioner, Datuk Dzulkifli Ahmad, recently announced that he wants to combat corruption and abuse of power, saying that “for those who are still intoxicated by bribery, please listen to this warning: stop the corruption and power abuse, and surrender yourself!” In the same speech, he also urged Malaysians to support the agency in its mission. The MACC’s recent action in the Sabah Water Department corruption case is a good sign that it is taking steps in that direction.
However, the MACC simply cannot carry out this task alone. The experiences over the last decade would surely have taught the administration some lessons: that apart from the government it serves, positive public perception is crucial to achieving its goals. Working with, instead of against, the community that it tries to educate is crucial if it wants to seriously fight corruption all round.
This is where independent civil society organisations can in fact come in to support the MACC in its efforts to fight corruption. Other expert bodies like accountants and lawyers can also support MACC’s work as many investigations involve technical and forensic accounting matters. However, the MACC must also demonstrate its willingness to have frank discussions and dialogue with civil society.
The MACC has seen tremendous transformations over the last decade and more, but fighting corruption seems to be even more challenging than ever. It is hoped that it is in these trying times partnerships and collaborations can be forged; all those in favour of fighting corruption – and this must be a priority this year – should surely come together.
– Tricia Yeoh firstname.lastname@example.org
The tentacles in the war against graft are spreading wide. Four Immigration officers who listed normal people as disabled, pocketing the RM200 application fee in the process, have been nabbed; a senior official from the Malacca Historic City Council is under probe; policemen who took bribes have been charged; and the Inland Revenue Board has also joined the fray, striking up a partnership with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. PETALING JAYA: Four Selangor Immigration officers were entrusted to receive and process applications for international passports.
Nabbed: Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission officers escorting four Immigration officers out from the Shah Alam magistrate’s court after they were remanded for six days.
Having access to the applicant database, they did much more than their job scope.
The quartet would pocket the RM200 international passport application fee received over the counter by “converting” the paid applications to that submitted by OKU (disabled) persons, who are entitled to free passports.
The officers had been pocketing large sums this way since 2014, with about RM1mil siphoned off.
An internal audit exposed the ruse recently.
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) raided the Selangor Immigration Department office in Shah Alam at 3.30pm on Monday and detained the four officers, two of them women.
The four suspects were brought to the Shah Alam magistrate’s court to be remanded for six days.
The investigation is under Section 18 of the MACC Act 2009 which involves submission of false claims with intention to deceive.
MACC deputy chief commissioner (operations) Datuk Azam Baki confirmed the arrests, describing the case as “very serious and warranting a very thorough probe.”
“We do not rule out the possibility that such fraud may also be occurring in other Immigration offices all over the country.
“This is not an isolated case and must be addressed,” he said.
An MACC official said the suspects were believed to be involved in the submission of payment vouchers with falsified information.
“The record is altered to show that the applicant is an OKU when he or she is not,’’ the official added.
Immigration director-general Datuk Seri Mustafar Ali said full cooperation had been extended to MACC, and had shared the outcome of its internal audit. – The Star
PETALING JAYA: Four Immigration Department front-line officers who are believed to have siphoned as much as RM1 million from the department have been detained by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
The suspects, aged between 31 and 39, include two female officers. They were arrested at the Selangor Immigration Department at 3.30pm on Monday and have been remanded for six days beginning today.
MACC sources said the officers took advantage of a fee waiver for people with disabilities (OKU) by fraudulently classifying normal applicants as OKU and pocketing the RM200 fee on each transaction.
Investigators learnt the suspects have been involved in the racket since 2014 and were only recently exposed after the Immigration Department conducted an internal audit.
The audit team became suspicious when it found a high number of passports issued to OKUs, and initiated a probe.
So far, the status of at least 100 normal passport holders have been found falsely classified as those belonging to OKU, and this is believed to be just the tip of the iceberg, and that there were some 5,000 more cases.
MACC investigators are probing assets amassed by the detained officers and believe such activities may also be prevalent at other passport issuing immigration offices nationwide.
MACC deputy chief commissioner (operations) Datuk Azam Baki said today that an indepth probe on the case is ongoing.
“This cannot be taken lightly as it has caused losses in government revenue. Moreover, it breaches the special privileges accorded to the disabled by the government,” he said.
MACC chief commissioner Datuk Dzulkifli Ahmad said the agency will use every law in existence to prosecute those involved in graft to make it clear that crime does not pay.
“Let me issue a warning … we will not only pursue prosecution under the MACC Act, but also use the Anti-Money-Laundering Act and the Income Tax Act,” Dzulkifli said in a speech at the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) today after witnessing the signing of a corruption-free pledge by IRB – the first government agency to do so after signing the Corporate Integrity Pledge in 2013.
“I urge you to stop immediately or face the consequences,” said Dzulkifli, adding that even if MACC cannot prosecute a corrupt individual, he or she would not be able to escape the IRB.
– Charles Ramendran and Lee Choon Fai Newsdesk@thesundaily.com
GEORGE TOWN: Four policemen were charged in the Sessions Court here today with corruption.
Corporal Jefry Abdullah, 35, from the Narcotics Department of the Northeast district police headquarters pleaded not guilty before Sessions Court Judge Roslan Hamid.
He is accused of trying to obtain RM1,000 for himself from Nor Esmawati Baharom as inducement not to take action against the latter’s brother in-law, Norhamni Haron by swapping a positive urine sample during a urine test at the district police headquarters.
He was alleged to have committed the offense at the Narcotics Department office of the Northeast district police headquarters about 4.40pm on Mac 1 last year.
Jefry was charged under Section 17(a) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 which carries a maximum 20-year prison sentence and fine not less than five times the bribe amount or RM10,000, whichever is higher.
The court fixed bail at RM8,000 with one surety.
In a separate charge, three policemen from the Datuk Keramat police station also claimed trial over a corruption charge.
Muhammad Farid Nordin, 28, Mohd Zulkifly Mat Nor, 28, and Zainoor Ariffin Rosli, 24, with another person still at large were charged with trying to obtain RM10,000 for themselves as an inducement not to take action against Norhamni Haron for possessing ganja.
They were alleged to have committed the offence at the Datuk Keramat police station on Mac 1, last year about 11.45am.
The trio were also charged under Section 17(a) of the MACC Act 2009.
MACC Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Ahmad Ghazali Mohd Nazri suggested bail of RM10,000 with one surety for each of the accused considering the seriousness of the case.
Roslan fixed bail at RM8,000 with one surety for each of them and set Feb 17 for mention.
V. Partiban represented all of the accused.
MACC DPP Amin Yaacub also appeared for the prosecution.
– Imran Hilmy email@example.com
“First of all, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) can only compel someone to declare his assets. Once the assets are d…
Year in review 2016 – MACC makes record haul in 49 years from top officers of Sabah Water depthttps://youtu.be/BL7sTmRnARk Azam Baki (L4) and other MACC officials with the cash and jewelry seized, at a press conference on Oct 5..
Structural defects to blame, stop history repeating itself !https://youtu.be/7FRTMX53TLc Sniffing out signs of life: The K-9 unit of the City Fire and Rescue operations looking for possible vict…
Jabatan Air Negeri Sabah – http://malaysianlogo.blogspot.my/2014/06/jabatan-air-negeri-sabah-sabah.html KOTA KINABALU: Everywhere in Sab…
Mar 23, 2016 … The Corruption case in the Youth & Sports Ministry Malaysia is a reflection of broken systems in country. The brazen embezzlement of …
Sabah’s watergate scandal unfolds THE amount involved in Sabah’s watergate scandal is unbelievable. The Malaysian Anti-Corru…
Water corruption, an integrity crisis is disruptive, debilitating, damaging and hurting us Water Corruption | SSWM http://www.sswm.info/content/water-corruption The Star Says: A crisis of integrity and a lesson to be learnt
SUNGAI BULOH: The fees for childcare centres across the country are expected to increase by at least 10% next year, says the Association of Childcare Centres Selangor.
This was due to the revised minimum wage, said association president Mahanom Basri.
“The increase depends on the management of the centre. If the rent, salaries and other expenditures have gone up, it will increase by between 5% and 10%.
“It won’t be a lot, but there will definitely be an increase,” she said here yesterday.
For example, Mahanom said a 10% increase from the RM300 fee per child would result in a new fee of RM330.
Besides the minimum wage, she said childcare centre operators also had to install CCTVs for extra security.
“Quality facilities require money so I hope parents are ready to pay for them,” she added.
The Government introduced the minimum wage policy in 2013.
On July 1, the monthly minimum wage was increased from RM900 to RM1,000 for peninsular Malaysia and from RM800 to RM920 for Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan.
Mahanom, together with more than 300 childcare centre operators, attended a dialogue session with Deputy Women, Family and Community Minister Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun yesterday.
One of the issues raised during the two-hour closed-door dialogue was the licensing fees charged by local councils.
“We have proposed to the local councils that they could treat childcare centres as community service instead of commercial business.
“By doing so, they can reduce the licensing fees,” Chew said.
She said the ministry was also looking into easing some regulations.
“We will be looking at the ratio; such as how many children should be cared by one minder without compromising on safety.
“Childcare service is important and the demand is big. Many families have both parents working so we need to have a strong childcare service,” she added.
By Nurbaiti Hamdan The Star/Asia News Network
Sep 11, 2016 … A childcare centre in a single storey terrace corner lot is allowed to house a …themselves to ensure our children get quality care and education.
REGRETTABLY Malaysia seems to be fertile ground for all sorts of scammers. Just yesterday I received a text message from Bank Negara Malaysia, warning me not to open emails that claim they are from BNM and ask for payment verification.
The newspapers report every month on hundreds of Malaysians losing millions of Ringgit to all sorts of financial predators.
These are the four types of financial predators you should be aware of.
Financial predators that are selling you something amazing (for them). Some financial predators are trying to sell you something and only later you find out that the item is not the best use of your money at all.
Watch out for these financial predators:
* The pyramid scheme operator who is selling you products which sound expensive and technologically sophisticated, but are worthless.
* The shop owner, who recommends expensive or high margin products, which turn out to be unpopular or old products to increase his profit or clear his inventory.
* The property agent, who pushes you to purchase a house despite knowing that there is a price correction coming. He just cares about getting his commission.
* Financial predators that want to make you rich (but make you poor instead).
Other financial predators are not selling you a product, but a dream: to be rich one day. You would be amazed to find out how much people are willing to spend in their pursuit of this dream. You can get rich in many ways, but not nearly as many, as ways in which you can get scammed.
For instance, consider:
*The investor or trader that is selling you currency, gold, stock or property with the promise of extremely high returns. Sometimes they don’t sell the assets, but a “secret” formula or (software) tool to always make a winning trade. Don’t fall for it!
* The prince, minister, lottery winner, retired general and other personalities which will reward you with a slice of their wealth. If first you pay some legal / custom fees.
* The fake lottery / contest predator, that tricks you into thinking you won a sizeable sum of money. You just need to pay up some administration fees before you can redeem your prize.
* The scratch & win agent and casino operator. “The house always wins.” You will bring more to the casino operator than he will give back.
* The (soccer) bookie, who extends upfront credit for you to place more bets and win back your losses. But if you keep losing, his friendly helpfulness will quickly vanish.
Financial predators that “just” want to help you (into bigger problems)
Some financial predators pretend they just want to help you – some may even say they have nothing to gain from it. Be aware of these sophists!
* The financial planner that gets more commission the more financial products you buy. Never mind whether you really need all that insurance and other financial products.
* The loan shark that will give you better rates or quicker disbursement than the bank, but asks much higher interest rates in return.
* The salesman that is selling you expensive insurance on top of your car / phone etc that already have guarantee from the manufacturer.
* The car dealerships and stores who encourage you to take their own (more expensive) financing plans instead of your bank’s instalment plans.
* The financial predator that is in love with you (or is it your money)?
* And then finally, the financial predator that lures you with dreams of romance. This one is the saddest of all, because doesn’t everyone deserve more genuine love in their life?
And isn’t it heart-breaking to see how scammers toy with people’s strongest desires, just for monetary gains?
Be aware for online girlfriends and boyfriends that contact you out of nowhere. Don’t be surprised when you find scammers that try to deceive you with romantic talk in the darkest of alleyways on the Internet (or just around the corner on Facebook and other social media apps).
Especially be wary if you have never seen your new love in real life or (s)he is a foreigner and needs your money in order to pay for visa or flights or to pay off local debts before (s)he is allowed to leave.
As you can tell, Malaysia and the world are full of financial predators. Don’t fall prey to them and become their lunch.
By Mark Reijman The Star/ANN
Mark Reijman is co-founder and managing director of https://www.comparehero.my/dedicated to increasing financial literacy and to help you save time and money by comparing all credit cards, loans and broadband plans in Malaysia. Keen on joining the team as a writer, then email firstname.lastname@example.org