KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 28 — PKR called today on Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom to break his silence over alleged abuse of RM32,150 in zakat money, piling the pressure on the minister in the prime minister’s department after a former top policeman called on the senator to be investigated. Retired city criminal investigation chief Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim had said today police should probe Jamil and two senior Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council (MAIWP) officials with the same vigour they showed in pursuing tithe collector Reduan Mohd Said for the same offence recently.
“Is there a difference between an ordinary tithe collector and a minister? Jamil Khir should not remain silent and answer these allegations which will cause outrage among Muslims,” PKR communications director Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad (picture) said.
Mat Zain said yesterday the minister in charge of Islamic affairs and the duo should face legal action for using zakat funds to settle personal legal fees last year as recorded in the Auditor-General’s report for 2010.
According to the report, Jamil, MAIWP director Datuk Che Mat Che Ali and MAIWP chief prosecutor Shamsudin Hussain had withdrawn RM63,650 from the council’s zakat fund to settle their legal costs.
The costs were incurred when Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim named the trio as respondents in his qazaf application.
The audit report also confirmed that the sum was repaid to the fund after the council obtained a RM700,00 grant in June last year as part of its general resources allocation from the government.
But Nik Nazmi said in a statement today MAIWP only repaid the amount in December.
“How is it that MAIWP can so easily use zakat funds meant for specific purposes for other expenses?” the Seri Setia assemblyman asked.
Mat Zain had insisted the trio committed misappropriation of property under Section 403 of the Penal Code and should be punished accordingly.
He also cited Section 409B of the Penal Code, which states that if any offence prescribed in Section 403 and 404 is proven, “it shall be presumed that he had acted dishonestly until the contrary is proved”.
No comments:
Post a Comment