KUALA LUMPUR – A lawyer whose legal firm was raided by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) last week has slammed the attempt by authorities to secure information, claiming that such efforts were a threat to legal professional privilege.
Lawyer Chetan Lachman Jethwani of Chetan Jethwani & Company said that while no client files or documents of any kind were handed over to the anti-graft body, the bid was “unlawful and a violation of the rule of law”.
“I state here unequivocally that no files or documents of any kind were produced or shown to the MACC.
“I objected to the attempted search and seizure on the grounds that the conduct of the MACC and IRB officers was unlawful, indiscriminate and would result in a violation of legal professional privilege.
“In particular, the MACC and the IRB officers had not compiled with the applicable legal provisions set out in the MACC Act 2009 and the Income Tax Act 1967,” Chetan said in a statement today.
He added that on October 6 at around 9.30am, five officers from the MACC and IRB had appeared at his law firm with an order to search the premises and seize documents.
They later returned with an order to produce documents and to appear to have his statement recorded at MACC’s headquarters in Putrajaya on the same day.
“The order to produce documents sought the production of a client file which contained information protected by legal professional privilege.
“A formal letter of detailed objections was addressed to and issued to the MACC chief commissioner (Tan Sri Azam Baki) and other senior officers (before) the statement being recorded.”
Chetan added that as an advocate and solicitor, he is duty-bound to protect and defend this privilege and will do so “unflinchingly”.
“I have issued a detailed letter of objection to the Malaysian Bar outlining the events that have transpired.”
He also alleged that there had been some “misleading, speculative and outright false information” in some media reports on the raid.
“The press reporting and other publications on this matter have sought to identify me by reference to other clients of mine who are unconnected to this matter.
“In this regard, a false and misleading picture has been presented resulting in baseless speculation as to the identity of the client whose privileged materials have been sought.”
He warned that he will not hesitate to take the appropriate legal action against any party that presents an impression of the events which may damage his or any of his client’s reputation.
Previously, law firm Rosli Dahlan Saravana (RDS) said MACC raided its premises on October 6 – the same day action was taken against Chetan’s firm – and attempted the seizure of some documents.
RDS later said that none of its clients’ documents were seized, reiterating the legal sanctity of a law office where client documents are legally privileged and cannot be seized by the MACC by reason of Section 56 of the MACC Act.
The legislation referenced states that notwithstanding any other written law, a judge of the high court may, on an application being made to him in relation to an investigation into any offence under the act, order an advocate and solicitor to disclose available information relating to a property liable to seizure under the act.
It also states that legal representatives are not required to comply with the order to the extent that such compliance would disclose any privileged information or communication that came to his knowledge for the purpose of any pending proceedings.
On October 7, an RDS partnership note sighted by Scoop confirmed that the anti-graft body is investigating the law firm over corruption allegations involving the firm’s efforts to recover 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) funds from US-based global financial giant Goldman Sachs.
Last Friday, Azam was reported as saying that an investigation had been carried out against a lawyer as part of the government’s efforts to recover 1MDB assets.
As of press time, the commission has yet to issue an official statement regarding its raids on the legal firms. – October 9, 2023
 and the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) last week has slammed the attempt by authorities to secure information, claiming that such efforts were a threat to legal professional privilege.){kind=link}