Kota Kinabalu: A key prosecution witness in the hearing of two former officials of the Sabah Water Department and one of their wives, who were charged with money-laundering, told the Sessions Court Wednesday that he has no idea of the action that MACC will take against two former State Infrastructure Development Ministers for allegedly receiving monies from the collection system because to his knowledge there was nothing about it being reported in any media platform.
Teo Chee Kong (pic), the prosecution’s 29th witness, said this during re-examination by the prosecution when asked to explain his answer to a question by counsel Datuk Tan Hock Chuan, who was representing former State Water Department Deputy Director Lim Lam Beng (third accused) during cross-examination.
Teo, in his testimony during cross-examination on March 10, testified that “as far as he knows, there was no action taken against Tan Sri Joseph Pairin and Datuk Raymond Tan by MACC.”
Teo on Wednesday explained that there were no reports from social media and newspapers about any action taken against the two.
He also said he did not know any action would be taken by MACC against Pairin and Tan.
Teo was the Deputy Director after Lim Lam Beng retired.
On trial were former State Water Director Ag Mohd Tahir Ag Mohd Talib, 58, and his wife Fauziah Piut, 55, who were jointly charged with Lim Lam Beng, 66, on 37 counts of money-laundering involving cash and bank savings amounting to RM61.57 million, as well as unlawful possession of luxury goods. They had, on Dec 29, 2016, pleaded not guilty to the charges.
When asked by the prosecution to explain why he disagreed with the suggestion by counsel for the first and second accused that it was his and Lim’s plan and had nothing to do with Ag Mohd Tahir regarding the meeting with Tan, Teo said it was because Ag Mohd Tahir was not interested in discussing with Tan.
Teo said Ag Mohd Tahir instructed Lim to take him to see Tan to tell him that there was a contribution from this scheme to him.
When asked why he disagreed with Lim’s counsel’s suggestion that Lim introduced him to Tan so that in the future, he could deal directly with Tan, Teo said for the first time, Lim took him to meet Tan and told him that there was this scheme and that there was a contribution for him.
“After a few months there was this contribution collection, Lim and I went to see Tan. Lim handed the money to Tan and Lim informed him that he was busy and said that I had been instructed as a runner and after that, I was the one to deliver,” said Teo.
DPP: You confirmed that you were involved in giving bribes to the highest officials of the Sabah State Water Department since 1998 and you knew it was a mistake but you did not care and still continued. Can you explain why?
Teo: Because since 1998, giving bribes to the highest officials is a culture in the Sabah State Water Department and there are also instructions from the highest officials of the Sabah State Water Department to collect the bribes and I just follow their instructions.
DPP: As the chairman of the quotation committee, you were involved in manipulating the quotation and you knew it was a legal offence and you still continued. What is your reason?
Teo: It is true that manipulation of quotations is an offence under the law, I only followed the instructions of the Director and Deputy Director for the manipulation of quotations. The quotation manipulation is a win-win situation between friendly contractors, Divisional Water Engineers and senior officials of the State Water Department such as the Director and Deputy Director and so on.
DPP: You agree that you have blackmailed friendly contractors if they do not contribute 10.75 per cent they will be blacklisted and you have also abused your power to force them to agree to this proposal at that time. Can you explain why?
Teo: At that time I did not feel like blackmailing them because these friendly contractors did get to profit from this scheme after the 10.75 per cent contribution and they volunteered to make this contribution. At that time I did not feel like abusing the power because they were willing to make a contribution.
DPP: You do not agree that you are the mastermind of this scheme based on the three actions that have been questioned to you before, why?
Teo: Because I am not the boss of the State Water Department. The State Water Department boss is the State Water Department Director and he has the authority to control what happens in the State Water Department. Without his approval, this scheme will not happen especially if he does not approve the allocation or give the allocation warrant, indeed this scheme will collapse.
DPP: The counsel also suggested that it was you who gave all these instructions to the friendly contractors and also the Divisional Water engineers, so you are the mastermind in this scheme and you disagreed, why?
Teo: Because the Director and Deputy Director of the Sabah State Water Department have instructed me to be a runner only in this centralise collection. Because they are my superiors and I only follow instructions.
DPP: The instructions regarding centralise collection are not minuted and are kept confidential according to your information. The counsel suggested that for that reason you have no supporting evidence to prove that there was a discussion about this centralise collection and you disagree. Why?
Teo: My proof that this discussion exists is that the other Divisional Water engineers and friendly contractors also know about this matter because they were involved in the discussion with me on April 6, 2005.
DPP: In your previous testimony during cross-examination, you confirmed that when your testimony was recorded by MACC more than 10 times, you confirmed that you spoke the truth during the investigation, including how you embezzled a lot of money. Can you explain?
Teo: When I was remanded on Oct 4, 2016, because I was not the mastermind in this scheme, I voluntarily cooperated with MACC at that time because I had evidence about this scheme and I gave evidence and exposed the secret of what happened all this time to MACC.
Teo was then released temporarily and subject to be recalled for cross-examination regarding a seizure form document.
Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPP) Mahadi Abdul Jumaat, Haresh Prakash Somiah and Zander Lim appeared for the prosecution.
Ag Mohd Tahir and Fauziah were represented by counsel Priskila Akwila Sinem and Mohd Fareeez Mohd Salleh, while Lim was represented by Datuk Tan Hock Chuan, Baldev Singh, Karpaljit Singh, Kelvin Wong and Aaron Lau.
Counsel Ram Singh, Lim Wen Jye and Kimberly Ye held a watching brief for Teo.
Trial continues.
* Follow us on Instagram and join our Telegram and/or WhatsApp channel(s) for the latest news you don't want to miss.
* Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available.
