The Anti-Corruption Agency should be going after senior lawyer VK Lingam instead of the informants, said former Sabah ACA chief Mohamad Ramli Abdul Manan who himself was a whistleblower.

Contacted today, Ramli said the ACA had erred in going after PKR vice-president R Sivarasa and party worker Sim Tze Tzin to reveal the whistleblowers behind the video that has rocked the country's judiciary.

The retired civil servant with 28 years of experience with the agency explained that the ACA can only go after the whistleblowers if the information is proven false.

"We (the ACA) would only go after the whistleblower when it is proven that the whistleblower wilfully gave information knowing that the information is false or does not believe in its truth, ," he told told Malaysiakini.

Ramli was commenting on the eight-minute video released by PKR three weeks ago that showed senior lawyer Lingam apparently brokering the appointment of 'friendly' judges with Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim in 2002.

Both Sivarasa and Sim then lodged a report with the ACA calling for an investigation into the video.

They were interviewed before being issued the notices to reveal the whistleblowers or face imprisonment.

The notice stated that failure to comply with the demand would be a breach of Section 29 (c) of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997.

Under Section 58 of the same Act, offenders would be liable to a fine of no more than RM10,000 or a two-year jail term.

Main evidence from tape 'actors'

However, Ramli expressed his confusion on whether the ACA is only investigating into the authenticity of the tape or into the alleged corruption that took place between Lingam and Ahmad Fairuz.

"If it is the former, I don't think they have the power to use any of the provisions of the Act.

"If it is the latter, then the ACA must first determine what are the corrupt acts alleged to have been committed by Lingam or Fairuz," he said.

Ramli elaborated that the ACA should be asking whether Fairuz made any payments to Lingam or promise him any form of gratification for helping him secure the CJ job; or whether Fairuz ever use his position after securing the CJ job in helping Lingam to win his cases.

"If this had been determined first then the investigating officer knows what to do and what evidences he has to secure to prove the alleged corrupt acts.

"I don't think it is that important for them to know who the informers are," he said.

Ramli also pointed out that it is important for the ACA to first verify whether the content of the tape is true or false.

"If it's true, then we get the evidence to prove that the conversation actually took place. The tape is merely to support the evidence.

"The main evidence would come from persons who heard what was spoken by Lingam and what Lingam told them after that and what those persons knew about Lingam's effort to fix judicial appointment," he said.

Ramli was a whistleblower himself last year when he revealed explosive allegations, ranging from corruption to sexual crimes against former ACA director-general Zulkipli Mat Noor.

The revelations came from a report sent by Ramli to then Inspector General of the Police Bakri Omar last year.

In July, Zulkipli was cleared of corruption allegations by Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail who said the investigation process did not show any criminal element in the form of practices, conduct or omission by Zulkifli or any other abuse of power.

Ramli also noted that the issue of notice to the PKR duo was an unprecedented move in ACA's history.

"To my knowledge (this action by) the ACA to compel the duo is the first in the history of the ACA. It is unprecendented and would discourage other informers to give information to the ACA.

"The ACA now it seems is too keen to win a small battle and to lose the big war in fighting corruption. They have to rethink their strategy," he added.

SPECIAL REPORT: The Lingam tape