AG must explain why Serba Dinamik case resolved with compound, says Gobind

·3-min read
Gobind Singh Deo wants the Attorney General to explain why the resolution of the Serba Dinamik case was settled by way of compound. — File picture by Yusof Mat Isa
Gobind Singh Deo wants the Attorney General to explain why the resolution of the Serba Dinamik case was settled by way of compound. — File picture by Yusof Mat Isa

KUALA LUMPUR, May 7 — DAP deputy chairman Gobind Singh Deo said Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Idris Harun should explain why he consented to the resolution of the Serba Dinamik case by way of compound.

Gobind said there have been numerous calls for the AG to explain his decision.

“The matter has generated a public debate and caused concern among corporate and capital market players all of whom expect regulatory bodies to play their roles effectively to ensure the credibility of corporate governance and capital market development in Malaysia,” he said in a statement.

The Puchong MP noted that the powers given to the AG under the Federal Constitution are wide.

“It is he who decides, depending on the facts of each case, whether to prosecute or not, and if there is a prosecution, in certain cases whether the matter can be dealt with by way of compounds.

“Section 373(1) of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 provides that the Chairman of the Commission may, with the consent of the public prosecutor, compound an offence under certain provisions of that act,” he said.

He also said concerns have been raised over the decision of the AG consenting to compounds in the case of Serba Dinamik.

“This is particularly so as section 373(2) says upon payment of the said compound, no further proceedings shall be taken against such person in respect of such offence.

“Whilst the attorney general is empowered to institute, conduct or discontinue criminal proceedings as mentioned earlier, the question is whether there should be transparency in the exercise of that power. It also raises the question of accountability which can only be assessed if there is an explanation to begin with,” he said.

Thus, Gobind said silence is no longer an option for the AG.

“As a public prosecutor, he must speak up, respond to and address the concerns raised.

“He must explain why he consented to the matter being resolved by way of compound and how that, on the facts of this case, inspires confidence,” he said.

Last December, the Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) launched an investigation with the initial consent of the Attorney General Chambers (AGC), where Serba Dinamik was charged under Section 369(a)(B) of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007.

Four officers — namely chief executive officer and group managing director Datuk Dr Mohd Abdul Karim Abdullah, executive director Datuk Syed Nazim Syed Faisal, group chief financial officer Azhan Azmi, and vice-president of accounts and finance Muhammad Hafiz Othman — were charged under Section 369(a)(B), read together with Section 367(1) of the same Act.

However, in an unexpected turn of events early last month, the AGC decided to withdraw the charges following a letter of representation by the accused. The AGC has not publicly explained its decision so far.

Related Articles Serba Dinamik share price dives as spooked investors dump stocks Serba Dinamik to file regularisation plan in eight months Serba Dinamik shares to resume trading on May 9 as firm complies with Bursa directive

Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting