PETALING JAYA: The Anti-Corruption Advisory Board (ACAB) members should resign and be held accountable over their actions involving Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief Tan Sri Azam Baki’s shares controversy, says Dr Edmund Terence Gomez.
Gomez, who resigned from the MACC’s Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel final month, mentioned that the ACAB board members had admitted that they haven’t any energy to exonerate Azam, one thing which they allegedly did in November final 12 months after listening to the highest graft buster’s rationalization in regards to the shares he owned in 2015.
“To my thoughts, the honourable factor could be that they must step down.
“Because… by their very own admission, they did one thing that they now acknowledge they should not have performed or they haven’t any authority to do,” he advised information portal Malaysiakini.
On Jan 5, the ACAB chairman Tan Sri Abu Zahar mentioned there was no pecuniary curiosity or battle of curiosity on the a part of Azam over the problem of buying shares of two corporations in 2015 because the chief commissioner didn’t buy the shares himself however was performed by his younger brother.
The board had referred to as for a gathering on Nov 24 final 12 months and had summoned Azam to clarify the allegations.
On Jan 8, the six had issued a press release, distancing themselves from the assertion made by Abu Zahar over the shares controversy implicating MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki.
Aside from Azman, Chua and Ismail, the opposite three are Datuk Seri Akhbar Satar, Datuk Dr Hamzah Kassim and Datuk Dr Mohammad Agus Yusoff.
They mentioned they weren’t glad with the reasons given by Azam, regardless of Abu Zahar saying in any other case in the course of the press convention final week.
Gomez urged the board members to provide the minutes of the Nov 24 assembly in order that the general public might see what had actually transpired within the dialogue.
“Did they act appropriately when the problem was first dropped at the board assembly on Nov 24?
“If, by their very own admission, they did one thing which they knew they’d no authority to do, which is to exonerate Azam, why did they do it?
“Should they be held accountable for exonerating Azam once they haven’t any authority to do that?” he requested.
Gomez additionally questioned how members of the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board have been chosen to hitch the board.
He claimed that the advisory board members had did not operate as required, which is to function a verify and steadiness mechanism for MACC and its high administration.
“This comes again to the query – who decides? Are we certain the members chosen to the advisory board and panel will do their job as verify and steadiness as required?
“Those are among the many classes we now have realized. This disaster has proven they aren’t functioning as they should operate,” mentioned Edmund.
by 
