Tuesday, 28 July 2009

Suspended CCID acquitted of abusing powers

Suspended Bukit Aman Commercial Crimes Investigation Department director Datuk Ramli Yusuff (right) was acquitted by the Sessions Court in Kota Kinabalu on a charge of abusing his powers two years ago.

Sessions Court judge Supang Lian, in her ruling yesterday, held that Ramli had no case to answer as the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against him and ordered the RM20,000 bail and all evidence to be returned to Ramli.

Ramli, 56,was charged under Section 15 (1) of the Anti-Corruption Act for abusing his public office through the unauthorised use of a police Cessna Caravan aircraft for pecuniary gain.

The charge provides for a jail term not exceeding 20 years and a minimum fine of RM10,000 on conviction.

Ramli was also charged with failing to declare the ownership of 20,000 Telekom Malaysia Berhad shares, 154,000 Permaju Industries Berhad shares and interest in two office properties worth RM1,032,840 at Megan Avenue II, Jalan Yap Kwan Seng, held by Bonus Circle Sdn Bhd, in which his sisters are directors.

He is alleged to have committed the offences at the office of the Anti-Corruption Agency’s deputy public prosecutor in Putrajaya on Sept 17, 2007.

On April 25, 2006, Ramli had also allegedly breached the Public Servants Rules and Regulations which prohibit him from being involved in business.

The offence, under Section 16 of the Penal Code, alleged that he was a director of Kinsajaya Sdn Bhd.


Lee said...

Of course ,he should be acquitted.In fact, he should not have been charged
in the first place.The charge was to intimidate him, nothing more nothing less!ACA, and now the "more powerful" MACCA, has been and is being perceived as an institution, like the Police or the Judiciary, to be used by the ruling party for whatever deem to be in its interest!
The MACC is not fighting corruption, but, instead ,is blatantly being used for political
reasons.Some pea-brained fellow even refer to it as a "Malay Institution".What can be more stupid!

kita anak melayu said...

Tok Mommy

ada banyak anjing yang perlu ditendang, nak tahu siapa mereka, bacalah blog ini


Anonymous said...

Teramat menakjubkan (inherently incredible) bahawa setelah memanggil 75 saksi (bukan satu atau dua saksi), Pendakwa nyata gagal membuktikan setidaknya kes primae facie.Adakah saksi-saksi itu yang dipanggil tidak relevan belaka? Kenapa sehingga begitu ramai saksi-saksi diperlukan?

Persoalannya sekarang,atas dasar apa pada awalnya Jabatan Peguam Negara memutuskan untuk mendakwa Dato Ramli? Apakah untuk saja-saja?

Dr Abdul Rani Bin Kamarudin
(Pensyarah Kanun Prosedur Jenayah dan Undang2 Keterangan)