Albert Tei’s legal representative has publicly refuted the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission's (MACC) assertion that he possesses 'key evidence' relevant to their investigation. The lawyer described such claims as entirely false and highly defamatory, calling them an outrageous attempt to mislead the public about his role in the case.
In a detailed statement, Mahajoth Singh explained that the documents cited in the notice he received earlier this week are protected under legal privilege, meaning they are confidential communications between a lawyer and their client, and cannot be disclosed without authorization. The notice in question requested him to appear for questioning today and also to surrender Tei’s mobile phone. However, Singh clarified that he does not hold Tei’s phone, contradicting MACC’s unfounded assertions.
He further emphasized that, as a solicitor, he is bound by professional confidentiality rules that prevent him from revealing privileged information or documents. Singh expressed frustration that MACC seems either unable or unwilling to recognize these fundamental legal protections. He reaffirmed his commitment to uphold his duties as Tei’s legal counsel, stating he will not be intimidated or coerced into breaching client confidentiality, regardless of potential repercussions for himself.
This controversy unfolds amid the backdrop of Tei’s recent detention. Alongside Shamsul Iskandar Akin, the former senior political secretary to Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, Tei was held for six days starting last Saturday to assist MACC’s ongoing corruption investigation. Their detention followed Tei’s allegations that he paid bribes to Shamsul in an effort to recover funds allegedly distributed to Sabah assemblymen.
Tei, who is at the heart of the alleged Sabah mining scandal, is also facing separate charges related to bribery. Meanwhile, a woman named Sofia Rini Buyong, who is also under investigation in connection with Tei’s claims, was arrested Thursday night and remains in custody until tomorrow.
And this is the part most people miss—these legal disputes and investigations are ongoing, and the truth remains elusive amid conflicting narratives. Do you agree with Singh’s stance on legal privilege, or do you believe MACC’s actions are justified? Share your thoughts below.
