THE money trail in the stock trading fiasco involving the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki should be extended to local bourse operator Bursa Malaysia which is the Securities Commission’s (SC) so-called sister regulator.

As what transpires in stock market transactions concerned Bursa Malaysia’s rules and regulations, it is only appropriate that the stock exchange states its stance on this issue, according to an ex-banker with 30 years of industry experience.

“Should Bursa be silent on this?” he asked FocusM on condition of anonymity.

“What about the stockbroking company involved in the transaction? Who did they take instructions from (Azam or his brother Datuk Nasir Baki) and were they in breach of the rules too?”

Yesterday, FocusM highlighted that since the SC has concluded that there was no breach of Section 25(4) of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 (SICDA), the onus is on the Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Mohd Zuki Ali and the Public Service Department (PSD) to investigate Azam if he had breached government regulations pertaining to the Behaviour and Discipline Management of Public Service Officer circular (Version 1.0 [2022]) which imposes a limit for civil servants to purchase shares.

According to the ex-banker, there is also a need for MACC to conduct internal inquiry if its own rules have been breached.

“As the leading figure, did he not lie in the first place by saying that it was his brother who used his account which is akin to perjury?  Honesty, integrity, credibility are all at stake here,” pointed out the ex-banker who was also familiar with the stock trading industry.

“How did he get that kind of funds which is substantial – even if it is from his brother – and is there a money trail to any major corruption case being absolved at that particular period?  What about declaration of his assets?”

Apart from Bursa Malaysia and MACC, social activist-cum-lawyer Charles Hector expressed astonishment as to why other law enforcement agencies, namely the police and the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) have not yet made any pronouncements about Azam.

“Remember that what the SC said is limited to an offence under section 25(4) of the SICDA (Securities Industry [Central Depositories] Act 1991) but they did not pronounce that Azam has not violated any other laws,” Hector noted in his latest blog posting.

“There then is a possible misconduct under Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1993 or violations of Service Circular Number 3/2002 (Ownership and Declaration of Assets by Public Officials) which prevents a public servant from owning more than RM100,000 worth of shares in any company).

“But, has the relevant disciplinary bodies started investigations and commenced disciplinary proceedings? Why is there a delay here?” – Jan 21, 2022

https://focusmalaysia.my/bursa-must-investigate-if-its-rules-are-breached-in-azam-bakis-money-trail/