The curious case of a tycoon’s son
Was Tan’s son ever charged in court? If yes, in which court and under what section? Was there a trial? Did he spend any time in prison? If the answer is “no”, how is it possible that the police’s recommendation that he be charged under a section carrying the death penalty by hanging was reduced to a charge so light that he didn’t even need to spend any time in prison?
Ashraf Abdullah, Free Malaysia Today
Attorney-General Idrus Harun has an obligation to explain to the public what really happened in the 2019 drug case involving billionaire Vincent Tan’s son.
It reeks of a scandal in the Crown, involving high-ranking government officials, and will remain that way for as long as the matter is not clarified.
What we know so far is that Tan’s son was arrested in December 2019 under Section 39(b) of the Dangerous Drugs Act which carries the mandatory death penalty for having a very large quantity of drugs in his possession. The police had eventually recommended to the AG’s Chambers to charge him under this section.
But that did not happen, according to Edisi Siasat, a whistleblower Twitter account.
Edisi Siasat, which has now re-emerged as Edisi Khas after the former was suspended by Twitter, alleged that the case was eventually classified as NFA (no further action).
In response to the allegations, then attorney-general Tommy Thomas had admitted on Feb 19 that he had reduced the charges preferred against the accused, but denied receiving any bribes.
But Thomas’ statement, instead of clearing the air, has raised more questions.
Was Tan’s son ever charged in court? If yes, in which court and under what section? Was there a trial? Did he spend any time in prison? If the answer is “no”, how is it possible that the police’s recommendation that he be charged under a section carrying the death penalty by hanging was reduced to a charge so light that he didn’t even need to spend any time in prison?
If he didn’t go to jail, was his charge dropped, like Edisi Siasat had alleged? How was it that the case was kept so hushed up that the media did not know about it? Google searches about this case being reported by the media drew a blank.
I have several other curious questions. How many other cases charged under Section 39(b) of the Dangerous Drugs Act, which did not involve children of tycoons, did Thomas find in his heart to reduce? How many people were actually sentenced to death for similar offences under Thomas’ recommendation?
In order to safeguard the integrity of the AGC and the judiciary, Idrus must come forward and clarify this matter. The questions being asked by netizens should not fall on deaf ears.
When one does not set the record straight, speculation will arise. And that, for the AGC, is not a good thing.
What is even more surprising is that not even a single leader of Pakatan Harapan, which was the government then, has raised this issue.
Ashraf Abdullah was formerly the group managing editor of Media Prima Berhad’s Television Networks.
