Manager, Family, Two Others Arrested for RM5.4M Graft at Terengganu Govt Subsidiary

2459
- Advertisement - [resads_adspot id="2"]

A family, comprising a man, his wife, two children and a daughter-in-law, remanded for investigation into alleged corruption.

The son of a manager of a Terengganu government subsidiary and a man believed to be a proxy were remanded for five days beginning yesterday for investigation into a corruption case involving about RM5.4 million.

Flanked by several officers from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), the two, both in their 30s, arrived at the Putrajaya Magistrate’s Court at about 9.40am.

On Wednesday, the MACC detained the business development manager of the Terengganu government subsidiary and four of his family members, as well as two others, at several locations in Terengganu and Kuala Lumpur for investigation into alleged abuse of power and corruption.

The 59-year-old manager, clad in a brown shirt, was led into the Kemaman Magistrate’s Court at about 8.40am on Thursday.

MACC

His 52-year-old wife followed a while later, covering her face with a brown headscarf.

The couple was remanded until Saturday.

They later left the courthouse in separate vehicles escorted by MACC officers.

Also arrested during the operations were the couple’s two children, aged 34 and 31, and their 34-year-old daughter-in-law, as well as two other proxies, both aged 40.

Bernama reported that according to a MACC source, preliminary investigations revealed the manager had given contracts and projects, between 2010 and 2017, to companies owned by his 52-year-old wife, two children aged 31 and 34, daughter-in-law aged 34 and the two proxies.

Reportedly, the manager’s wife is the director of one of the companies while his two children are shareholders.

His 34-year-old daughter-in-law is the owner of another company that was awarded some projects.

Two other proxies were also company owners who were awarded projects by the government-owned subsidiary which provides training and expertise in certain fields.

Allegedly, the companies also failed to carry out several projects and courses but had made claims for payment.

Investigation of the case was made under Section 18 and 23 of MACC Act 2009.