Lim Guan Eng today questioned why the Securities Commission (SC) didn’t disclose if Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner Azam Baki’s brother had a trading account.
The DAP secretary-general said the SC needs to explain if proxy trading was involved, as well as the source of funds for the purchase of the shares.
“Azam was a significant holder of warrants in the public listed company Excel Force MSC Sdn Bhd as of March 2016, when he was head of the MACC investigations unit.
“In his share trading account, Azam bought millions of shares and warrants in public listed companies with a value well over the RM100,000 cap on equity holdings to be held by civil servants,” he said in a statement.
Azam allegedly owned 2.15 million shares in Excel Force MSC Bhd in 2015, as well as 1.93 million shares in Gets Global Bhd the same year and 1.02 million shares the following year.
He said that he allowed his brother, Nasir, to use his trading account to purchase shares from the two companies.
Concerns were raised over whether he had declared the shares as required of a civil servant and how he had acquired the money to buy the shares.
Lim was commenting on SC’s statement that they were unable to determine if Azam had breached any rules in allowing his trading account to be used by his brother.
SC said investigations have ended but “based on evidence gathered, the SC is not able to conclusively establish that a breach under the Act has occurred”.
The SC did not state what would happen next given that its investigation was inconclusive.
Lim said that if the SC is unable to act on proxy share trading, then it should also explain the action taken against at least three individuals who were charged and fined millions of ringgit under the Act in the past.
“This is clearly double standards. Is SC going to return the fines they paid and apologise for prosecuting them?”
He said that unless the SC can act against Azam, the Act has been rendered impotent and broken.
“Unfortunately, the repercussions for Malaysia’s capital markets will not only be a loss of investor confidence but also puts the SC in the dock, whether it is capable of performing its statutory duty without fear or favour.”
Lim added that SC’s regulatory and enforcement failure contradicts its legal duty as a self-funded statutory body entrusted with the responsibility to regulate and develop the Malaysian capital market.
This, he added, is particularly about rule-making and enforcing regulations pertaining to the capital market. – TMI
Jan 18, SC: Azam inquiry inconclusive