MACC Shocked At Lim’s Acquittal, But Never Shocked At Shahrizat’s Cowgate Scandal Acquittal

Pin It

Sep 04 2018
Linked In

Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng has been acquitted of corruption charges over the purchase of a bungalow allegedly below the market value. The former Penang chief minister together with businesswoman Phang Li Koon (who also faces the corruption charges) was freed by the Penang High Court. However, the acquittal has raised eyebrows and jaw-dropping firestorm.


Surprisingly, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) says it is “shocked” over the acquittal of Mr. Lim and Ms Phang. In a statement, the MACC claims – “The MACC would like to stress that the decision was made by the Attorney General’s office and not the MACC.” Lim’s counsel Ramkarpal Singh said he was “shocked” by the MACC’s shock over Lim’s acquittal.


Joining the bandwagon is Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. Expressing his shock, probably made with tongue-in-cheek, Mahathir said – “They (MACC) have a right to be shocked. If they want to be shocked, they can be shocked. I am also shocked. If the court makes a decision which to me is wrong, I also never comment on it.”

Penang Bungalow Scandal - Lim Guan Eng - Mahathir Shocked Tongue-in-Cheek

So, what is so special about Lim’s acquittal that everyone appears to be shocked? The joint trial of Lim Guan Eng and Phang Li Koon was in connection to the conversion of land from agriculture to residential status, and the purchase of a plot of land and a bungalow at below market value. Every Tom, Dick and hamsters knew there was no case from the beginning.


Those who think otherwise have pointed out to the similarities between Lim’s bungalow and former Selangor Chief Minister Khir Toyo’s bungalow scandal. Mr. Toyo had failed to convince judges that his bungalow was purchased based on “willing buyer-willing-seller” basis and was sentenced for 12 months behind bars. Therefore, Mr. Lim should be sent to jail too, they argued.


However, both bungalow scandals are different from the beginning. You can go to this article written 2 years ago and read why both aren’t the same. MACC obviously has shot itself in the foot after expressing its’ shock over Lim’s acquittal. Why should it be so shocked unless MACC has been playing the roles of a judge, jury and executioner under the previous Barisan Nasional government?

Lim Guan Eng Bungalow – RM2.8 Million (Jalan Pinhorn, Penang)

Lim’s lawyer Ramkarpal has offered his reason of being shocked over MACC’s shock. According to Ramkarpal, MACC should not be shocked because the director of its own legal and prosecution division, Mohd Masri Daud, was the one who had informed the court that he was withdrawing the charges. However, MACC claims later that Masri is not an MACC officer.


Mr. Masri, acting as the deputy public prosecutor, asked the court to consider a discharge not amounting to acquittal for the two. However, Judge Hadhariah Syed Ismail decided to discharge and acquit both Lim and Phang, after agreeing with defence counsel that it was not right for the public prosecutor to leave a cloud hanging over their heads as they might be charged again in the future.


Judge Hadhariah justified that so far the prosecution had called 25 witnesses to testify in the trial last March and now in September the prosecution had asked the case to be discharged not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA). She said – “Six months later, the prosecution may call for other witnesses. There is no such thing especially in public interest case.”

Penang Bungalow Scandal - Lim Guan Eng and Phang Li Koon

Ramkarpal, on the other hand, said – “I am shocked that the MACC is shocked over the decision. They (MACC) obviously have knowledge and been informed that the charges will be withdrawn, as the entire process involves the MACC. Is the MACC saying that the AG (Attorney General) did not consult them? This is a serious allegation.”


So, what the hell is happening within MACC? It appears there’re different warlords or little Napoleons within the anti-corruption agency. Either there’re pro-UMNO or pro-Najib corrupt officers within MACC trying to sabotage the new government, or the entire MACC is playing politics – hedging its bet over the possibility of a return of ex-premier Najib or UMNO to the federal government.


Worse still, there could be MACC warlords who are aligned to certain component party of the Pakatan Harapan coalition tasked to ensure the downfall of Lim Guan Eng, the Secretary-General of the Democratic Action Party (DAP). If Lim is found guilty, he will most certainly lose his Finance Minister post, allowing another component party to snatch and claim the important portfolio.

Penang Bungalow Scandal - Lim Guan Eng Reaction After Acquitted

Amazingly, the perception is Lim Guan Eng must go through the trial, even if there isn’t sufficient and compelling evidence, and be found guilty. And he must be sent to prison to prove that the new Pakatan Harapan government practices accountability. He cannot be acquitted because to do so would be seen as a cover-up, no matter how innocence he is.


Lim Guan Eng must go through a trial, be found guilty and sent to prison because he’s the leader of Chinese-based DAP. Not only will DAP lose its jewel Finance Minister post, the imprisonment of Lim will also weaken the incredible strong party. Certain parties – regardless whether friends or foes – will benefit greatly with a weaker DAP in the coalition government.


It’s both flabbergasted and entertaining that MACC found it shocking that Lim Guan Eng’s RM2.8 million bungalow scandal was acquitted but didn’t find it shocking when the husband of former UMNO Wanita Chief Shahrizat Abdul Jalil was acquitted of two charges of criminal breach of trust involving RM49.7 million after the prosecution informed the court that it did not wish to pursue the matter.

NFC Scandal Shahrizat

Why MACC is extremely offended that the prosecutor did not wish to pursue Lim’s case but the same MACC wasn’t offended at all that the prosecutor did not wish to pursue Shahrizat’s case in 2015? In fact, the infamous Cowgate scandal had much stronger evidence of convicting Shahrizat’s husband (Mohamad Salleh Ismail) and throw him in jail.


In the Cowgate scandal, Shahrizat and her family members practically had siphoned RM250 million of taxpayers money meant for National Feedlot Corporation (NFC). Her husband, Mohamad Salleh Ismail, and their children Wan Shahinur Izran, Wan Izzana Fatimah Zabedah and Wan Shahinur Izmir, were made directors at NFC, enriching themselves with jaw-dropping salaries.


As NFCorp Chairman, Shahrizat’s husband Mohammad Salleh Ismail paid himself RM100,000 monthly salary, while 31-year-old son Izmir was paid RM45,000 monthly as executive director. Another son Wan Shahinur Izran, 27, commanded RM35,000 a month as CEO and 25-year-old daughter Wan Izzanah Fatimah was paid RM35,000 as a director. The family was paid a total sum of RM215,000 every month.

Cowgate Scandal – Shahrizat Family Received RM215000 Per Month In Salary

NFCorp admitted that nearly RM600,000 of its funds was used to pay for credit card expenses, mostly accumulated by the despicable family. Shahrizat’s husband had also admitted to the purchase of two luxury condominiums in Bangsar costing RM6.9 million each. They had also purchased a RM500,000 Mercedes Benz CLS 350 CGI, two plots of land and paid holiday packages.


Heck, Shahrizat had even sent most of the beef produced by NFC to three luxury restaurants – Meatworks, Senor Santos and Brawns Steakhouse – owned by her family in Singapore. The crooks had also purchased two condominiums at Marina Bay Financial Center suites costing RM34.6 million. In total, Shahrizat’s family had bought RM62 million worth of condos.


When compared to Shahrizat’s RM250 million Cowgate scandal, why did MACC cherry-pick and chooses to be bloody shocked at Lim’s RM2.8 million bungalow instead? There’s nothing to be shocked. Lim Guan Eng didn’t acquit himself. MACC’s job is to investigate and Attorney General Chamber’s job is to prosecute. After calling 25 witnesses and still without strong evidence, it’s only natural to drop the case.

Marina Bay Suites Cows Choose Condos


Other Articles That May Interest You …

Pin It

FinanceTwitter SignOff
If you enjoyed this post, what shall you do next? Consider:

Like FinanceTwitter Tweet FinanceTwitter Subscribe Newsletter   Leave Comment Share With Others


This is LGE’s No.2 strategy-comparison;eveyone know Sharizat case is fraud and so is LGE’s, making 2 wrongs doesn’t it right. A simple logic thinking instead of proof finding,would a sane person sell his/her property 2 at 2 million discount? It’s as absurd as the Arab donor

The timeline. LGE first rented the bungalow when he became the CM of Penang. He then bought the bungalow in2012 which Henry Butcher valued as appropriate. The land conversion was done in 2015. I find it amazing why Phang Li Khoon ‘paid LGE’ 1.5m (being the value of 4.5m in 2015 – 2.7m valued in 2012) to secure some favours into the unknown future.

“To those who are claiming this is proof the new Pakatan Gov is no different to BN, please understand the facts of this case before passing judgement._

The issue with this property purchase was not the value of the house itself. But the allegation that he bought the house under value in return for selling the state Gov land at Taman Manggis below market price.

But what most people don’t know is that that Taman Manggis land was first offered to Gerakan but Gerakan couldn’t come up with the money. The state gov then held an open tender which LGE excused himself from because of conflict of interest. After months of negotiations, the tender was subsequently given to KLIDC.
BN was harping on the price of the house but to date did not come up with any proof linking the sale of the house to the land sale.

That’s what the court was supposed to find out._
Selling a property below value is not a crime. It’s a willing seller willing buyer deal. In order to find LGE guilty the court needed to prove that the lower price of the house was an inducement to manipulate the sale of the land to favour the owner of the bungalow. That clearly did not happen because it was an open tender. Hence the acquittal of LGE.”

” The AG Tommy Thomas is not at all involved in this decision. A new DPP got the case files to evaluate possible charges. A recommendation is made by the DPP base on the evidences and the judge made the formality ruling.

The evidence is weak. Let’s take into account when the biz person Phang Li Khoon bought the house at 2.5 mil and sold at 2.8 mil to LGE. She did not even make a capital loss but if factor in possible market price, then only possible to consider a loss.

And LGE stays at the house for 5 years before looking chance to buy it as naturally, people wants to own their home rather than keep paying rental. For Khir Toyo, the developer bought at 6 million and sold to Khir at 3 mil. Very clearly he made a loss and that is not considering the market price yet……if market price is taken into account, much more was given to Khir Toyo. So this raise higher suspicion.

Also in the approval process, what are their roles comparing between Khir and LGE? Is LGE personally involved in the committee meetings to grant to specific developer? Or is it a proposal from the committee and LGE was even not in this committee? Whereas Khir was directly involved in the decision to favour the developer.

Of course the AG Chamber will look into which is the stronger case and goes for it to avoid tax wasted. But the Opposition Umno and PAS and others who for their own agendas refused to take all these details into consideration. “

Leave a Reply


(required)(will not be published)