MACC chief withdraws suit against whistleblower

MACC chief Azam Baki has discontinued his defamation suit against whistleblower Lalitha Kunaratnam.

As a result, the Kuala Lumpur High Court has vacated the initially set July 9 trial date for the civil action over an allegation linked to his ownership of shares in two public-listed companies.

Azam’s counsel from the law firm Zain Megat & Murad filed the notice of discontinuance on June 11.

The filing was also signed by Lalitha’s counsel from Khairuddin, Ngiam & Tan.

The notice stated that the defamation action was discontinued without liberty to file afresh and without any order to cost.

The filing also stated that the plaintiff discontinued the action “on the basis of no prejudice and without admission of both parties”.

According to a letter from Azam’s lawyers to the civil court dated June 11, the MACC chief commissioner’s legal team indicated that the plaintiff and defendant had achieved an amicable settlement.

Through a press release on Jan 12, 2022, Azam’s legal team announced the filing of the defamation action. The MACC chief was suing Lalitha in his personal capacity.

He previously issued a letter of demand to Lalitha via his lawyers, demanding an apology and RM10 million in damages.

Lalitha stood by her reports and criticised the MACC’s attempt to rope in the police to investigate her.

Ownership of shares

Azam came under the spotlight over his ownership of 1,930,000 shares in Gets Global Berhad (previously KBES Berhad) on April 30, 2015, worth around RM772,000 at the time.

His shareholding in Gets Global went down to 1,029,500 as of March 31, 2016, worth around RM340,000 at the time.

He also held 2,156,000 warrants in Excel Force MSC Berhad in March 2016.

The share ownership in 2015 and 2016 raised questions on whether it is commensurate with his income as a public servant.

In a special press conference on Jan 5, 2022, Azam did not dispute the ownership of the shares but claimed they were bought in his name by his brother. The shares have since been transferred to his brother.

Nearly a week later, on Jan 18, the Securities Commission (SC) announced that it had concluded its inquiry into the case and that it was unable to conclusively establish that a breach under Section 25(4) of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 (Sicda) had occurred.

However, following criticism, the SC clarified that Azam had “control” over his own trading account and found no evidence of proxy trading.

In her statement of defence against the defamation suit, Lalitha contended that she was prepared to prove in court the contents of her online articles regarding the issue.

However, in reply to her statement of defence, Azam countered that Lalitha could not be considered an investigative journalist, claiming she lacked credibility and was untrustworthy.

Malaysia will 'go to the dogs' if govt fails to bring change - Anwar

Azam's return shows PM flippant about whistleblower protection - C4

July 9 next year full hearing of Azam Baki’s suit against whistleblower

Whistleblower ready to prove in court claims linked to Azam’s shareholding