KUALA LUMPUR, June 27 — The Malaysia Crime Prevention Foundation wants law enforcement agencies in the country to show greater transparency in how cases are investigated and disposed of, especially if they do not end up in court.
Its senior vice-chairman Datuk Seri Ayub Yaakob said that the foundation has received many complaints on investigations that have gone dormant and ended up being classified as “No Further Action”, The New Straits Times reported today.
“Many were dissatisfied because they received no updates on their cases, and some were unhappy that their cases were classified as ‘No Further Action’.
“We also received complaints from those who had their bank accounts frozen. The prolonged investigations made them unable to pay their workers, suppliers, and others,” he was quoted as saying.
Ayub also added that enforcement officers should update those involved in a case about the progress of investigations and that is crucial to identify the cause of delays in investigations.
“We need to know (the reasons behind delays in an investigation), especially for certain cases such as commercial, scam and fraud cases.
“It is understandable that an investigation takes time, but at least keep the complainant informed about its status,” he was quoted as saying.
Ayub also hoped that the ministers overseeing the law and institutional reforms portfolio would enhance the investigation and prosecution aspects, particularly in enforcement agencies.
He said that the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) should be more vigilant in taking action against enforcement personnel who were sitting on cases or mishandling investigations.
“We have the EAIC, but we never hear of them taking action (against any enforcers) for their delay in investigating or over inadequate investigations. We have them (EAIC), and they get paid, but what are they doing?
"They have power... if you look at the law, they can even take over an investigation and prosecute investigation officers who fail to conduct proper investigations.
“So they should not just sit there and ignore (such cases),” he was quoted as saying.
Ayub also said that it was not just investigators that played a role, but that every delay in the justice process should be reviewed for improvement.
“Once an investigation is complete, the papers would be referred to the prosecutor or attorney-general, who would review whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with legal action or if additional evidence is needed.
“The police will wait for their decision on whether they need to gather more evidence.
“Whether the case will proceed to court is not the investigator's decision,” he was quoted as saying, adding that it was the court's responsibility to set the trial dates as well.
Ayub added that MPs should also inquire about cases that has been dropped from prosecution.
“It is the A-G's prerogative (on whether to proceed with a case), but the parliamentarians should take action... they can inquire in (Parliament) and it will be answered normally by the ministers upon getting an explanation from the Attorney General's Chambers,” he was quoted as saying.
Another watchdog, the Malaysia Corruption Watch president Jais Abdul Karim told the newspaper that there should be a special channel for the public to request updates on cases.
Jais said it was important for the authorities to share a preliminary report consisting of the basic facts of a case, the individuals involved, and relevant details.
“Press conferences are needed, especially in high-profile cases, to provide updates and answer any concerns.
“This allows for direct communication and explanation of issues that are crucial.
“Enforcement agencies should also make use of their platforms and update their social media in stages to ensure public access to the information,” he was quoted as saying.
