Contractor paid DAP for its advance, RCI told

Businessman Lee Wye Wing today told the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) on Teoh Beng Hock’s death that DAP had paid contractors in advance out of its own funds, for works in the Seri Kembangan state constituency.

Lee (left, in light blue shirt) said that method of trade made things “easier”.

“It is a matter of convenience. It is easier for DAP to pay their supplier first (and when the state subsequently reimburses the contractor) the contractor pays back (DAP’s initial payment to the party),” he said.

He was responding to questions during cross-examination by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah on four invoices extracted from Teoh’s laptop.

In the invoice, aside from payment to companies for use of its name as a front and to third-party contractors, payments were also made out to DAP Malaysia and its Serdang Aman branch, ranging from 30 to 70 percent.
 
Shafee asked if Lee would be able to produce receipts acknowledged by DAP Serdang Aman and DAP Malaysia on the claims.

Shafee: Why (did) you continuously pay some DAP outfit... Is this a way of raising funds for the political party?  Can you produce the receipts for the claim?

Lee: The receipts are there, but it is with the accountant and it will take time to get (them).

At this point the panel’s chief commissioner James Foong interrupted and ticked off Shafee,  reminding him that only the commission can direct the witness to produce evidence.

“If MACC wants it, they can use their powers to get it... we are not going to do their homework for them. You can put the question to Lee if he can produce the receipts, but that’s about it,” he said, demanding to know its relevance to their probe.

Shafee argued that the receipts are important to determine Teoh’s state of mind during his time at MACC.

“It would be a direct reason (as to) why Teoh was stressed that night - not only was he guilty; his boss and his entire party is involved in taking the government’s money,” said Shafee in defence.

Foong, however, shot back that it was a matter for the panel to decide.

However, the chief commissioner admitted he was also troubled by DAP’s arrangement, and criticised the ruling Pakatan government for not being able to separate its parties from the government administration.

Echoing Foong on this, commissioner Abdul Kadir Sulaiman asked: “Why did you (Lee) have to tap political parties’ funds?”

Lee replied again that it is “easier” for DAP to engage their known suppliers and for the contractors to reimburse the party the amount paid up front, as the land and district office would later approve the claims.

‘Teoh unaware of Alibaba companies’

The 52-year-old, who is testifying for the first time over Teoh’s death, also admitted to engaging ‘Ali Baba’ companies to secure projects awarded to Class F contractors, a category exclusive to bumiputeras.

Shafee asked Lee if he knew that “merely using the (different) company’s name is a breach of regulations, in relation to Class F contractors?”

Lee answered after a short pause that “legally” it is against the law.

He nodded when Shafee explained that those caught sourcing out their Class F license to third parties to perform the task awarded are at risk of being deregistered.

The Selangor MACC has claimed they were investigating irregularities in the disbursement of state fund by Seri Kembangan assemblyperson Ean Yong Hian Wah and other state assemblypersons, when Teoh was taken in as a witness on July 15, 2009.

He was found dead the next day on the fifth floor service corridor of Plaza Masalam, where the then Selangor MACC office was located on the 14th floor.

It was previously noted that Teoh, a witness in MACC’s probe, was suspected of drafting four “incomplete” invoices from the companies.

The companies mentioned were MKMN Enterprise, Syarikat Aris, Fizami Construction and MA Bina Melor Enterprise.

Shafee asked Lee if Teoh was aware that these activities were against the Treasury’s circular, at which point Lee denied that Teoh had knowledge of the arrangements with the Ali Baba companies.

Abdul Kadir added that if Teoh had not known of how these companies worked then, he would have known by the time MACC questioned him.

'Shortcuts didn't seem wrong'

The commissioner earlier had contemplated over whether these arrangements had bothered or worried Teoh.

Lee testified that he had bumped into Teoh at the MACC Selangor office (below) and chatted with him for about 15 minutes some time past midnight on July 16, 2009, hours before the latter’s death.

The witness said Teoh spoke a few words, and that he seemed upset that the enforcement officer had confiscated his personal laptop.

Lee added that Teoh looked bothered and seemed to be in deep thought, but did not appear to have been physically harmed before they parted ways.

Asked for his opinion on what could have been bothering Teoh, Lee said he could not tell for sure.

But at that point of time, the working arrangement “did not seem like it was something morally wrong”, he added.

“We were just doing it normally... It is a very natural process. Now that it comes out (when MACC investigated) and when people see it (out in the open) it doesn’t look nice... not nice for DAP Serdang Aman to be involved,” said Lee.

He then went on to explain that a couple of the companies engaged by his company were registered as WSK Services and Hong Chye Enterprise for several projects in 2008.

Lee, who was questioned in detail on the invoices, said that he had prepared the documents and emailed them to Teoh.

“I prepared this based on the guidelines of the land (and district) office. Once I was done, I sent them to Teoh and asked him to verify with YB (Ean Yong) to see (whether) it is okay or not,” Lee told panellist Bar Council lawyer Robert Lau.

“For Fizami and Aris, the invoices were claims for work done, (and) for MKMN and Bina Melor, they were just a quotation before I could start work,” he added.

“The invoices were prepared by me... Even the spelling mistakes are mine. In fact, Teoh was the one who pointed it out to me but I don’t know why the letterhead changed,” said Lee.

He produced a copy of the finalised invoice to the commission on the questionable change of letterheads.

The inquiry resumes tomorrow with Lee as its witness.