.png)
THE family lawyer of Datin Seri Pamela Ling Yueh revealed on Wednesday that the woman had filed a judicial review against the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to challenge a travel ban imposed on her and also the commission’s power to exert pressure on her to resolve private disputes against her estranged husband.
According to reports in The Edge, lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo also said the judicial review filed on April 7 was to also challenge Ling's arrest and remand without proper legal basis, which allegedly breached due process.
In a statement for the family, the lawyer said the MACC and police need to answer some serious questions regarding Ling’s mysterious disappearance since April 9.
Sangeet said police have alleged that individuals impersonating police officers may have been involved in intercepting Ling.
“If true, this raises troubling questions about public safety and enforcement integrity. How such an incident could occur — let alone in proximity to a high-security government premises (near MACC headquarters) — without detection is shocking.
“Even more troubling is the inability or refusal of the police to clearly state whether any of its officers were officially instructed to arrest or detain Pamela on the day she disappeared. Surely the police must maintain records of such operational directives. If, in fact, no such instructions were issued, then it follows that those who apprehended her were impersonating police officers. This is a basic and critical fact,” she said.
Sangeet further said it was difficult to comprehend, amid allegations, that individuals may have impersonated police officers to detain a member of the public, and the authorities have yet to offer clarity over the matter.
Question MACC’s actions
Sangeet said records show the MACC had subjected Ling to a sustained and systematic campaign of pressure over several months, and she had been subjected to an unexplained travel ban since last October with an order to report to the MACC monthly.
Despite this, Ling had never been charged with any offence, she added.
“She was summoned yet again on April 9, 2025 [one day before her scheduled reporting date] — her ninth attendance — to provide further statements. She disappeared on that very day upon arriving near the MACC’s Putrajaya office.
“This pattern of conduct by MACC was far from ordinary and totally inconsistent with the treatment expected toward a witness assisting in investigations. Just two days before her disappearance, Pamela filed the judicial review application,” the lawyer said.
She explained that the MACC had pursued Ling relentlessly for several months but was suddenly silent.
“How is it that an agency so invested in her whereabouts has now chosen to say nothing about her disappearance? No public statement has been issued on the circumstances of her last scheduled attendance.
“No clarification has been offered as to whether MACC flagged any risk to her safety despite knowing that she was involved in sensitive financial and matrimonial disputes locally and in Singapore, involving alleged fraudulent transfers of company shares, alongside a suit for the division of a substantial pool of matrimonial assets,” she asked.
To date, Sangeet said MACC has not confirmed whether it has shared all relevant information with the police, what occurred on the day of the incident in or just outside MACC grounds, including information about security guards on duty at the material time or whether a missing person report was ever lodged by the commission itself.
“The integrity of our institutions depends on full answers being provided,” the lawyer said as reported by The Edge.
Was there full disclosure by MACC?
When MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki urged the public not to blame or speculate about the commission, Sangeet responded that the key question is whether all relevant information was disclosed.
"Did the MACC disclose to the police at the earliest opportunity, including details of investigations, as it could have assisted in a line of inquiry at a critical period?” she said.
Azam recently told the New Straits Times that it was unfair to blame the commission over the case, as Ling's abduction took place on a public road, outside of MACC's compound and beyond their control.
Azam was quoted by the newspaper that there was no way to predict Ling’s safety.
"On these occasions, nothing untoward had occurred and there were no signs that she was threatened. The MACC will continue to cooperate fully. Our investigating officer who was tasked with taking her statement has also had a statement recorded by police,” Azam said. - May 7, 2025