“Incompetent DPPs: AG should hire private sector lawyers to prosecute”
My question is simple: why did the prosecution under the jurisdiction of the AG Chambers not present a thorough case against Zahid?
Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy, Focus Malaysia
THE Shah Alam High Court judge could have made the right decision in acquitting former deputy prime minister and UMNO president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of corruption in the case of the foreign visa system (VLN).
It is without a doubt that the prosecution’s witnesses were unreliable and the money trail could not be conclusively established between those who gave the bribes and the receiver, Zahid.
Perhaps it didn’t cross the mind of the judge that the bribe in bigger currency notes might have been possibly placed in the envelopes.
I believe that the question of whether the envelopes used to contain the currency might have missed the core issue of corruption – whether there were reasonable grounds to believe that Zahid was indeed the receiver of the bribes.
As I have said earlier, the judgment in acquitting Zahid might have been appropriate on the basis of the evidence before the judge.
The onus was on the proof established by the prosecution.
Sad to say, the prosecution represented by the deputy public prosecutors (DPPs) did not do the job that was expected of them.
Differing standard
There is world of difference in the way the former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor were prosecuted in comparison to how Zahid was prosecuted.
It is mind-boggling that such an important case could have been dealt with in a frivolous manner by the DPPs.
The Attorney-General (AG) must ensure that competent and senior DPPs must be allowed to prosecute in high-profile cases.
If not possible, then private sector lawyers should be hired to prosecute. In fact, there are many private sector lawyers who are willing to do the job of cleaning the country of the scourge of corruption.
