PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was pressuring Datin Seri Pamela Ling Yueh before her abduction, claims her family’s lawyer.
Lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo alleged that Pamela had been subjected to a “sustained and systematic campaign of pressure” by the MACC during the course of their investigations.
“She had appeared at the MACC on no fewer than nine occasions, cooperated fully, and was never charged with any offence. Despite this, she remained under an unexplained travel ban from at least October 2024, with an order to report to the MACC monthly,” Sangeet said in a statement on Wednesday (May 7).
She also added that Pamela had filed a judicial review application in the High Court just two days before her disappearance against the MACC to challenge their actions.
The application alleged that the Commission used its powers under the MACC Act and Anti-Money Laundering Act “to exert pressure on Pamela to resolve private disputes with her estranged husband, rather than for legitimate investigative purposes.”
ALSO READ: ‘Hubby not ruled out in case’
It also alleged that Pamela had been arrested and remanded without legal basis and that she had been subjected to the travel ban without explanation despite full compliance with MACC requirements.
“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 spanning 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 said.
Sangeet also said that the suspects that were thought to have impersonated police to abduct Pamela raised questions about enforcement integrity.
“How such an incident could occur, let alone in proximity to a high-security government premises without detection is shocking.
“Even more troubling is the inability or refusal of the PDRM to clearly state whether any of its officers were officially instructed to arrest or detain Pamela on the day she disappeared,” she said.
ALSO READ: Who really took Pamela?
Previously, chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki told a news daily that it was unfair to blame the MACC over Pamela’s disappearance.
He added that there was no way to predict threats to her and that she had been to the MACC headquarters several times before to assist in the investigation of a money laundering case.
Azam added that those sessions went on without incident and that they had no signs that she was being threatened.
Pamela’s lawyer N. Sivananthan, reportedly said he had seen a police report filed by the e-hailing driver, who claimed his car was intercepted just before reaching the MACC headquarters in Putrajaya.
The driver also claimed three cars were involved, and that a man wearing a police vest and a woman in police uniform allegedly asked Pamela to follow them.
Pamela’s brother, Simon Ling Wan Siong, previously said she was abducted in Kuala Lumpur while on her way to meet MACC officers.
As of Sunday, no ransom demand had been made in connection with her disappearance.
