KUALA LUMPUR: Maritime industry expert Datuk Seri R. Jeyenderan has called for clarification from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on the status of a report he lodged in June concerning the handling and movement of petroleum cargo at Tanjung Langsat, Johor.
Jeyenderan, chief executive officer of Maritime Network Sdn Bhd, said he had provided documents and information to the authorities and was seeking a formal update on whether the matter remained under assessment or investigation, or had been concluded.
He said he had received several automated communications from MACC indicating that action had been taken on the report, but had not received a final written explanation on its status.
“I received four emails beginning in June and an SMS in September stating that the case was under ‘MACC Action’. More than four months have now passed and I am seeking clarification on the current status of the report,” he said in a statement.
Jeyenderan also questioned whether there was a consistent approach to communicating the status of complaints involving different categories of cases.
“Why does it appear that some cases receive public attention while an issue involving international maritime trade has yet to receive a clear update?” he asked.
He stressed that the question was not intended to interfere with the MACC’s investigative processes or seek preferential treatment.
“I only want to know whether the case is still being investigated or whether it has been classified as NFA (No Further Action). If it is still being investigated, tell us. If it is NFA, tell us,” he said.
Jeyenderan said his company had cooperated with the authorities and supplied information requested during the process.
The report, lodged on June 5, relates to what he described as alleged discrepancies between bill of lading documentation and the physical movement of petroleum cargo at Tanjung Langsat.
He said the issues raised involved international petroleum cargo, trade documentation, Customs procedures and cargo traceability.
Jeyenderan said he was also seeking clarification from the Royal Malaysian Customs Department (RMCD) concerning the Customs treatment of the cargo.
According to him, questions remained over the application of the K8 procedure, including the discharge and storage of petroleum cargo in shore tanks and the regulatory requirements, if any, governing the mixing or blending of cargo with existing inventory.
He said these matters required clarification from the relevant authorities and should not be interpreted as an allegation of wrongdoing by any particular individual or organisation.
Jeyenderan also referred to a recent meeting with the Ministry of Finance (MOF), saying the company understood that the discussion had included a view that no duty implication arose based on the information presented.
He said, however, that the company was seeking a written explanation setting out the basis for any such determination and the applicable regulatory requirements.
“We had a meeting with the Ministry of Finance last week. We understood that the position presented was that no duty was imposed on the cargo as presented. We are seeking confirmation of the applicable position in writing,” he said.
Jeyenderan said greater clarity would help businesses understand their responsibilities and comply with the relevant regulatory and documentation requirements.
He added that prolonged uncertainty could create difficulties for companies involved in international petroleum trade, particularly when cargo movements involve multiple parties and regulatory processes.
However, he acknowledged that authorities might be unable to disclose certain information while an investigation or assessment was ongoing.
“I respect the investigative and regulatory powers of MACC and RMCD. I also understand that certain information may not be disclosed while a matter is ongoing.
“What we are asking for, where legally permissible, is a clear indication of the status of the matter and the applicable procedures,” he said.
Jeyenderan said he would continue seeking clarification through the appropriate channels.
He stressed that his objective was to obtain greater certainty over the applicable procedures and documentation requirements, rather than to seek any particular outcome in favour of his company.
The concerns raised by Jeyenderan represent his requests for clarification and do not establish that any individual, company or government agency has committed an offence or acted improperly.
