Husband & Wife Immigration Officers Caught ‘Earning’ RM900k in Bribes, Used It to Open Jewellery Store

LocalPolitics
13 Sep 2025 • 5:19 PM MYT
WORLD OF BUZZ
WORLD OF BUZZ

#1 social news site in M'sia that delivers you the latest & trending news from politics, entertainment, life, and more.

image is not available

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has revealed that a husband-and-wife duo working in the Malaysian Immigration Department (JIM) were arrested under ‘Op Dygo’ for allegedly using hundreds of thousands of ringgit obtained through bribery to open a jewellery shop in Pahang.

The suspects, both in their 40s, have been placed under a five-day remand until 14 September, following approval from the Ayer Keroh Magistrate’s Court.

image is not available

Allegedly solicited RM900,000 in bribes over four years

In a statement posted on its official TikTok account, MACC said the couple is believed to have facilitated the entry of foreign nationals into Malaysia without proper documentation.

Further investigations revealed that the couple used the wife’s younger sister as a proxy to open the jewellery shop, with an initial capital of approximately RM600,000.

image is not available

MACC Deputy Chief Commissioner Dato’ Sri Ahmad Khusairi Yahaya stated that the suspects were involved in the amnesty programme, which allowed employers to obtain legal work permits for undocumented foreign workers.

Ahmad Khusairi explained that employers paid RM700 in bribes for each foreign worker to expedite the process, with the money distributed among officers handling the relevant files. The suspects allegedly received RM150 per worker.

Bribe money used to open jewellery shop and buy luxury vehicles

image is not available

Over four years, the couple allegedly amassed RM900,000 through bribery. The funds were used to open the jewellery shop and purchase luxury vehicles.

During a raid at the shop in Pahang, MACC discovered 3kg of gold, estimated to be worth RM1.4 million.

The case is currently being investigated under Section 16(a)(B) of the MACC Act 2009.

 

So, what do you think of this case? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.

 

image is not available

Source:

Source:

Source:

This post first appeared on WORLD OF BUZZ.