KUALA LUMPUR: The growing number of investigations that have gone dormant has prompted calls for greater transparency in the progress of probes into ongoing and past cases.

Malaysia Crime Prevention Foundation (MCPF) senior vice-chairman Datuk Seri Ayub Yaakob said the foundation had received many complaints from dissatisfied complainants and suspects who have suffered as a result of delayed investigations and prosecutions.

“Many were dissatisfied because they received no updates on their cases, and some were unhappy that their cases were classified as ‘No Further Action’.

“We also received complaints from those who had their bank accounts frozen. The prolonged investigations made them unable to pay their workers, suppliers, and others,” he said, adding that enforcement officers should update those involved in a case about the progress of investigations.

Ayub said it was crucial to identify the cause of delays in investigations.

“We need to know (the reasons behind delays in an investigation), especially for certain cases such as commercial, scam and fraud cases.

“It is understandable that an investigation takes time, but at least keep the complainant informed about its status,” he said, adding that he hoped the ministers overseeing the law and institutional reforms portfolio would enhance the investigation and prosecution aspects, particularly in enforcement agencies.

Ayub also took a swipe at the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC), saying it could have been more vigilant in taking action against enforcement personnel who were sitting on cases or mishandling investigations.

“We have the EAIC, but we never hear of them taking action (against any enforcers) for their delay in investigating or over inadequate investigations. We have them (EAIC), and they get paid, but what are they doing?

“They have power… if you look at the law, they can even take over an investigation and prosecute investigation officers who fail to conduct proper investigations.

“So they should not just sit there and ignore (such cases),” he said.

Ayub said delays in prosecuting cases, however, should not be blamed on enforcement agencies alone.

“Once an investigation is complete, the papers would be referred to the prosecutor or attorney-general, who would review whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with legal action or if additional evidence is needed.

“The police will wait for their decision on whether they need to gather more evidence.

“Whether the case will proceed to court is not the investigator’s decision,” he said, adding that it was the court’s responsibility to set the trial dates as well.

He said it was also the responsibility of members of parliament to inquire about cases dropped from prosecution.

“It is the A-G’s prerogative (on whether to proceed with a case), but the parliamentarians should take action… they can inquire in (Parliament) and it will be answered normally by the ministers upon getting an explanation from the Attorney-General’s Chambers,” he said.

Among cases highlighted in the media but had since gone silent is the abduction of M. Indira Gandhi’s youngest child, Prasana Diksa, by her estranged husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah in 2010.

Riduan is believed to have left the country, but despite a court ordering the authorities to bring him and the child back, no progress has been made.

There are also other cases that have gone dormant, leading to questions whether any action will be taken.

Two such cases are that of the six policemen alleged to have extorted Chinese citizens living here and that of a policeman who was caught driving while under the influence of alcohol.

The last update on the extortion case by the police was that two officers had been confined to desk duties.

Former inspector-general of police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador, when he was about to retire in 2021, had slammed the police Integrity and Standard Compliance Department for not taking action against errant cops.

Hamid said the media had a responsibility to ask for updates on every case, and it should never be prevented from getting the information.

He said there was a former minister who had restricted police from engaging with the media.

“The A-G has the final say on whether a case will proceed to court, and if he finds that a case lacks evidence, he can drop it or KIV (keep in view) until and unless the police or Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) can furnish the required evidence later on.

“Whatever it is, it is pertinent that the authorities do not deprive the media of getting updates from time to time.

“(A minister) previously gagged police from engaging with the media frequently, but I do hope that the IGP and deputy IGP work well with the media.

“The media is not a monster,” he added.

Echoing Ayub and Hamid, Malaysia Corruption Watch (MCW) president Jais Abdul Karim said the MACC’s Timeline of Cases on its website was a good initiative that demonstrated the enforcement agency’s transparency.

However, he suggested that there should be a special channel for the public to request updates on cases.

Jais said it was important for the authorities to share a preliminary report consisting of the basic facts of a case, the individuals involved, and relevant details.

“Press conferences are needed, especially in high-profile cases, to provide updates and answer any concerns.

“This allows for direct communication and explanation of issues that are crucial.

“Enforcement agencies should also make use of their platforms and update their social media in stages to ensure public access to the information.”

---

This article first appeared on NST. Graphic used on the header of this post courtesy of NSTOnline.