Melaka temple chairman and secretary remanded over fund abuse
MELAKA: The chairman and secretary of a temple association in the state have been remanded for six days until Monday (June 23) to assist in the investigation into the embezzlement of RM50,000 from the house of worship last year.
Magistrate Uthman Abd Ghani granted the remand application by the Melaka Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) against the two men, aged 61 and 75, to assist in the investigation under Section 23 of the MACC Act 2009.
Sources said that they were arrested at 11.45 am yesterday when they appeared at the Melaka MACC office to assist in the investigation into a case related to the abuse of power and position by withdrawing association funds without any approval or presentation at a committee meeting.
The money was said to have been expended for personal use.
Meanwhile, Melaka MACC director Adi Supian Shafie when contacted confirmed the arrest and remand.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
No whistleblower protection for Sabah case informant– MACC
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has confirmed that the person set to be charged alongside two Sabah assemblymen in connection with a corruption case involving mineral mining licences is not protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. Its Legal and Prosecution senior director, Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, said Section 11(1) of the Act clearly states that anyone involved in the offence they report is not eligible for protection. "If a person is involved in the wrongdoing, they are not protected under the Act and therefore cannot be considered a whistleblower," he told Bernama today. He said to qualify for protection, a report must be made in good faith to a recognised enforcement agency such as the MACC, the police, or other authorised government bodies. "Reports made with malicious intent, such as to seek revenge or defame others, do not meet the criteria for protection," he added. Wan Shaharuddin also stressed that a key requirement under Section 11(1) is that the whistleblower must not be complicit in the wrongdoing being reported. If found otherwise, any protection granted may be revoked. "This is to preserve the integrity of the whistleblower framework and prevent it from being misused as a 'shield' by those trying to escape accountability," he said. Earlier, the individual's lawyer claimed his client was a whistleblower who had cooperated with authorities, but was later informed he would be charged in court on June 30. Recently, several video clips allegedly featuring conversations involving certain individuals and Sabah elected representatives discussing corrupt practices linked to mineral mining activities went viral on social media. Previously, MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki confirmed that two Sabah assemblymen and another individual are expected to be charged in court this month in connection with the scandal. – BERNAMA
Barnama
5 hours ago
- Barnama
Individual In Sabah Mineral Licence Case Not Protected Under Whistleblower Act
KUALA LUMPUR, June 18 (Bernama) -- The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has confirmed that the individual set to be charged alongside two Sabah assemblymen in connection with a corruption case involving mineral mining licences is not protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. Its Legal and Prosecution senior director, Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, said Section 11(1) of the Act clearly states that anyone involved in the offence they report is not eligible for protection. 'If a person is involved in the wrongdoing, they are not protected under the Act and therefore cannot be considered a whistleblower,' he told Bernama today. He said to qualify for protection, a report must be made in good faith to a recognised enforcement agency such as the MACC, the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM), or other authorised government bodies. 'Reports made with malicious intent, such as to seek revenge or defame others, do not meet the criteria for protection,' he added. Wan Shaharuddin also stressed that a key requirement under Section 11(1) is that the whistleblower must not be complicit in the wrongdoing being reported. If found otherwise, any protection granted may be revoked. 'This is to preserve the integrity of the whistleblower framework and prevent it from being misused as a 'shield' by those trying to escape accountability,' he said. Earlier, the individual's lawyer claimed his client was a whistleblower who had cooperated with authorities, but was later informed he would be charged in court on June 30. Recently, several video clips allegedly featuring conversations involving certain individuals and Sabah elected representatives discussing corrupt practices linked to mineral mining activities went viral on social media.
The Star
5 hours ago
- The Star
'Whistleblower' in Sabah mining scandal not protected because they were part of the wrongdoing, says MACC
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has confirmed that the individual set to be charged alongside two Sabah assemblymen in connection with a corruption case involving mineral mining licences is not protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. Its Legal and Prosecution senior director, Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, said Section 11(1) of the Act clearly states that anyone involved in the offence they report is not eligible for protection. "If a person is involved in the wrongdoing, they are not protected under the Act and therefore cannot be considered a whistleblower,' he told Bernama on Wednesday (June 18). He said to qualify for protection, a report must be made in good faith to a recognised enforcement agency such as the MACC, the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM), or other authorised government bodies. "Reports made with malicious intent, such as to seek revenge or defame others, do not meet the criteria for protection,' he added. Wan Shaharuddin also stressed that a key requirement under Section 11(1) is that the whistleblower must not be complicit in the wrongdoing being reported. If found otherwise, any protection granted may be revoked. "This is to preserve the integrity of the whistleblower framework and prevent it from being misused as a 'shield' by those trying to escape accountability,' he said. Earlier, the individual's lawyer claimed his client was a whistleblower who had cooperated with authorities, but was later informed he would be charged in court on June 30. Recently, several video clips allegedly featuring conversations involving certain individuals and Sabah elected representatives discussing corrupt practices linked to mineral mining activities went viral on social media. Previously, MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki confirmed that two Sabah assemblymen and another individual are expected to be charged in court this month in connection with the scandal.- Bernama
