Who’s the ‘mystery’ 42-year-old CEO linked to RM92.5 bil COVID-19 stimulus packages embezzlement?

ONE wonder whether there were ‘double standards’ or self-censorship on the part of the media for choosing not to reveal the identity of the so-called private company CEO in the centre of misappropriation of COVID-19 stimulus packages worth RM92.5 bil by the former Perikatan Nasional-led (PN) government (main pic).

At a glance, this is not so much of public shaming or ‘passing the guilty verdict’ as the individual who was believed to have accepted bribes to connect contractors and other parties was only brought to the Putrajaya Magistrates’ Court on Friday (Jan 6) and remanded for five days to facilitate investigation.

Such curiosity comes begging after one mainstream media ‘openly’ mentioned the names of two senior company directors linked to the ‘fire sale” of the Menara Kuala Lumpur concession after the duo were issued with a four-day remand order – also by the Putrajaya Magistrates’ Court – yesterday (Saturday, Jan 7).

Could this be due to the quantum of the alleged criminal involvement whereby that related to Menara Kuala Lumpur entailed a transaction sum of a mere RM3.8 mil which dwarfs many folds from the RM92.5 bil in the COVID-19 stimulus packages case (not to mention ‘political sensitivities’)?

After all, both cases were being investigated under Section 16 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009.

As both cases attract massive public interest with the bottom line being that they both entailed the embezzlement of national assets or taxpayers/investors’ funding, wouldn’t it be sensible for the names of the individuals who are pre-supposed to have a role in the wrongdoings to be made a public knowledge?

After all, why must there be selective naming – what makes the 42-year-old CEO so special compared to “the two senior directors of a company with the ‘Datuk’ title”?

The two senior company directors linked to the ‘fire sale” of the Menara Kuala Lumpur concession were brought to the Putrajaya Magistrates’ court yesterday (Jan 7) for remand order (Pic credit: Bernama)

Wouldn’t it be legally binding that once the individuals concerned are brought to the courts for remand order, this would qualify media practitioners to name them although understandably this again can be a matter of choice or editorial policy to avoid legal complications later?

In this regard, it goes a long way in doing the media industry a huge favour if the MACC can issue a media statement that divulges the identity of the said individuals – especially in cases that generate massive public interest – once a remand order has been issued against suspects whom the graft buster has earlier arrested.

Moreover, this will quash rumours and speculations – not to mention ‘wrong naming’ – of the suspects in question. This is especially so as social media and interested netizens are bound to ‘jump the gun’ to speculate “who the culprits are”.

In all frankness, in today’s so wired world, one just has to Google search the name of the case and the names of the remanded individuals will pop up either on blogs or social media sites. Well, in the name of justice, either you name them all or you don’t name them at all. – Jan 8, 2023

 

Main pic credit: Free Malaysia Today

Subscribe and get top news delivered to your Inbox everyday for FREE