Former Kuala Lumpur criminal investigation department chief said that there are only
the Attorney General Ghani Patil is not likely to charge the directors of the National Feedlot Corporation directors as otherwise he would also have to charge former Malacca Chief Minister Abdul Rahim Thambi Chik, former International Trade and Industry Minister, Rafidah Aziz and former MAS chairman Tajudin Ramli.
He said there are 3 main elements for someone to be charged for CBT:
- dishonest misappropriation
- conversion to own property
- dishonestly uses or disposal of the property
but only one ingredient needed to justify charges.
Read more of Shahrizat's family unlikely to be charged, says ex-top cop courtesy of Malaysiakini below:
Shahrizat's family unlikely to be charged, says ex-top cop
4:19PM Feb 27, 2012
A former senior police officer believes that the attorney-general chambers will not charge those linked to the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) for criminal breach of trust (CBT), despite strong evidence to support the charge.
Former Kuala Lumpur criminal investigation department chief Mat Zain Ibrahim, when contacted, said that based on documents related to NFC's condominium purchases and documents pointing to NFC funds being used to fund trips, he believes that there were elements of CBT.
However, based on his experience in investigating high profile individuals in the past, Mat Zain believes that the CBT charge would not be slapped on NFC's bosses because they are the family of Women, Family and Community Development Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.
"If the attorney-general were to charge Shahrizat's family based on police recommendations, then he may also have to charge (former MAS chairperson) Tajudin Ramli, according to police recommendations.
"Then, the attorney-general may have to follow up by charging (former Malacca chief minister) Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik and (former International Trade and Industry Minister) Rafidah Aziz.
Only one ingredient needed
In 1994, Mat Zain was the investigation officer that was tasked with probing Tajudin. He was also involved in the investigations on Abdul Rahim and Rafidah.
Mat Zain explained that in his three examples, the police or Anti-Corruption Agency, as it was then known, had made recommendations that they be charged for various offences.
He said this when asked to comment on Bukit Aman commercial crime investigation department director Syed Ismail Syed Azizan'srecommendation that NFC chairperson Mohd Salleh Ismail be charged with CBT.
Mat Zain, who also read law, said three main elements should be cited in a CBT case namely dishonest misappropriation, converts to his own the property, or dishonestly uses or disposes the property in violation of any direction of the law.
“The prosecution is only required to fulfill one of the above ingredients - not all three, but one,” he stressed.
Companies don't perform umrah, people do
Explaining further, Mat Zain said the purchase of a condo using the NFC funds, and registering the condo in their own names is as good as transferring cash into personal accounts.
“If this is not converting to ones’s own use, what is?” he asked.
“Another example are the allegations against Mohamad Salleh and his son Wan Shahinur that they performed the umrah in 2010 using company funds amounting to some RM31,000 or so.
"If this can be proven than no need to argue. It’s 100 CBT. Companies are not required to perform umrah, only individuals are," he said.
Last November, PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution revealed that NFC funds were used for Mohamad Salleh and his son Wan Shahinur Izran for them to perform the umrah.
Mat Zain was the investigation officer in the Rahim and Rafidah cases.
In a related development, attorney-general chambers head of prosecution Tun Abdul Majib Tun Hamzah refused comment when asked respond to Syed Ismail's statement.
He said his department have yet to receive investigation papers from the police.
Yesterday, NFC in a statement said it was shocked with Syed Ismail for going public on the matter and accused him of trying to pre-empt the attorney-general's decision over the matter.