Prime Minister has never interfered in charges, says AG

Gani urged Khir stop pointing fingers at any parties alleging a conspiracy or political pressure.

Instead, he asked Khir to prepare his last chance to appeal in the Federal Court over his conviction over the purchase of a multi-million ringgit mansion in Shah Alam.

“I want to stress that there was never any form of political interference on me. I made the decision to charge Khir based on the statements from the investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and in accordance with existing laws,” he said in a strongly-worded nine page statement.

He also stressed that the Prime Minister has never interfered in any matter relating to the charging of anyone.

“There has never been political interference and we will not allow any kind of political interference in matters relating to the Attorney-General’s Chambers,” said Gani.

Gani explained that the charges against Khir was based on solid evidence and was “not based on political factors or making Khir a "kambing hitam"(scapegoat).”

He pointed out that Khir has been represented by a team of renowned and experienced lawyers, has been heard in full, reached the Court of Appeal, and has been heard by three wise judges.

“Khir Toyo should be mindful and wise in making assumptions, especially when it is baseless,” Abdul Gani wrote, arguing that Khir was putting forward a simplistic argument that failed to take into account every single fact that lead to his conviction.

Gani said that Khir’s statements in his blog was almost acting in contempt of court by claiming that the three Appeals Court judges had failed to determine if the benchmark for the purchase was sufficient reciprocation.

Gani pointed out that the judges had thoroughly scrutinised the testimony before arriving at their judgment and had also answered the defendent's question.

He said that the judges had ruled that “market price” is not the only yardstick but that they should also consider the “circumstances” to measure the value of the property Dr Khir had bought off Ditamas Sdn Bhd director Datuk Shamsuddin Hayroni while in office.

“Just because the judges in the Court of Appeal did not accept Khir Toyo's argument does not mean matter was not answered.

“As such, Khir Toyo should not cloud the facts of this case by accusing the judges did not mention the benchmark to be used, when he had been proven to have used his position to get or purchase the property at a price he knew was wholly unreasonable from its owner,” Gani said.

The A-G said that Khir was not right in saying that the the CBT charge under Section 165 of the Penal Code was not a corruption charge, explaining that it was in fact a prescribed offence under the Anti-Corruption Act 1997, at the time of offence.

The section, explained Gani, dealt with government officials who received or obtained something from someone he knew to have official business with him without sufficient reciprocation.

This was related to abuse of power towards an individual, said Gani.

He said the maximum penalty upon conviction under Section 165 of the Penal Code was two years' imprisonment or a fine or both, which was far lighter than the maximum penalty under the MACC Act 2009, which prescribes a jail term of up to 20 years.

In Khir’s blog posting on Friday, Khir claimed that he was made into an “icon” to show the Prime Minister's seriousness in tackling corruption and a victim for political interest.

A day before that, on Thursday, a three-man panel in the Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that the High Court judge did not make any appealable error in arriving to finding Khir guilty as charged.

Khir was found guilty by a Shah Alam High Court two years ago for knowingly purchasing two pieces of land and a bungalow in Shah Alam at a much lower price(RM3.5million) than its original value.

He maintained his innocence in his blog, stating that he would be found guilty in the end regardless of the evidence.