Jayanthi Naidu , who was VK Lingam's secretary until 1995, had in 2008 told the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the VK Lingam video tape case that she was instructed by her former boss to make travel arrangements for him and his family together with Tun Eusoff Chin and his family to New Zealand in 1994.
So when the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has recently said that it was unable to proceed with the investigation into the New Zealand trip because it could not locate a key witness, Malaysians were surprised and had wondered why she had gone missing.
It was therefore shocking that after Jayanthi was produced in Parliament to disprove claim that she had gone missing, MACC has clarified yesterday that she is not the missing key witness in the investigations into the Lingam video clip.
However, MACC's clarification was not convincing as one simple fact remains--how many Malaysians would have thought that Jayanthi was not the missing key witness ?
Hence, to avoid public allegation that the missing key witness could be a non existing person cooked up to avoid embarrassment to MACC for having earlier given a misleading answer or even to cover up the new Zealand trip corruption issue, the MACC must reveal the identity of the missing key witness.
I do not see how the MACC can effectively dispel public doubt and allegation except by naming the key witness whom they have claimed has been untraceable.
So when the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has recently said that it was unable to proceed with the investigation into the New Zealand trip because it could not locate a key witness, Malaysians were surprised and had wondered why she had gone missing.
It was therefore shocking that after Jayanthi was produced in Parliament to disprove claim that she had gone missing, MACC has clarified yesterday that she is not the missing key witness in the investigations into the Lingam video clip.
However, MACC's clarification was not convincing as one simple fact remains--how many Malaysians would have thought that Jayanthi was not the missing key witness ?
Hence, to avoid public allegation that the missing key witness could be a non existing person cooked up to avoid embarrassment to MACC for having earlier given a misleading answer or even to cover up the new Zealand trip corruption issue, the MACC must reveal the identity of the missing key witness.
I do not see how the MACC can effectively dispel public doubt and allegation except by naming the key witness whom they have claimed has been untraceable.
Comments
Post a Comment