By Timothy Achariam | The Edge Malaysia
Two individuals linked to the “corporate mafia” scandal had claimed that they could halt an ongoing probe by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) into Revenue Group Bhd (KL:REVENUE) co-founder Brian Ng Shih Chiow, according to a police report read out in court on Tuesday.
The offer was conditional on Brian Ng agreeing to the duo’s terms in a simmering dispute over the company’s shareholdings, according to the report.
The police report lodged by Brian in March 2023 was read out in the Sessions Court by lawyer Datuk Amer Hamzah Arshad, who is representing him and his brother Dino Ng Shih Fang in a case where the brothers are charged with fraudulently causing a bank employer to dispose of a vehicle belonging to the company without a resolution by its board of directors.
The report was read out during the cross-examination of prosecution witness Datuk Eddie Ng Chee Siong, the former chairman and co-founder of the company.
In the report, Brian recounted a meeting on Feb 4, 2023, at The Social in Publika with a Datuk Chong Loong Men and Francis Leong Seng Wui, purportedly to discuss the corporate dispute involving the latter and his brother.
“During the meeting, Chong and Francis told me that they would stop the MACC investigation against me and my brother if I agreed to their settlement terms,” the report quoted Brian as saying.
Brian further claimed the pair indicated they could arrange for the MACC to return mobile phones seized from him and his brother as a “gesture of goodwill”.
“Chong and Francis also stated that as a gesture of goodwill, they would instruct the MACC to return me and my brother’s cellphone next Monday.
“I felt scared and worried because Chong and Francis indirectly said that the MACC was under their control and would follow their instructions or collude with them in this corporate dispute,” the report cited Brian as saying.
The brothers were charged on March 14, 2023, under Section 403 of the Penal Code for alleged criminal misappropriation of Revenue Group’s property involving a Toyota Vellfire. They are accused of having common intention to cause a CIMB Bank Bhd officer to register the car under Dino’s name, which was done without the company’s board of directors resolution.
Eddie, when referred to the police report, told Amer that he had no knowledge of the meeting mentioned in the report.
The witness, however, agreed with Amer’s contention that he had brought in Leong into Revenue Group as the executive director on Jan 17 of the same year, and that Chong, who is a lawyer, has no mandate from the company to hold meetings with the brothers.
During an earlier proceeding of the case on April 7, Eddie told Amer that he was introduced to Leong via Chong, despite claiming that he personally did not know the lawyer.
On Monday, the same witness had denied Amer’s contention that Leong was brought into the company’s board a month before the meeting in Publika, as a way to kick out the Ng brothers (Brian and Dino) from the boardroom via an alleged “hostile takeover” of the company.
Eddie, however, agreed with Amer’s contention that he did not carry out background checks on Leong before recommending him to join Revenue Group’s boardroom.
But the witness disagreed that the absence of such checks would equate to gross negligence on his part.
The so-called “corporate mafia” scandal gained traction following a Feb 12 report by Bloomberg, which alleged that a network of business figures — including individuals such as Francis Leong Seng Wui and Chong Loong Men — had links to efforts to influence corporate control battles.
The report, citing insiders, claimed the group worked in tandem with certain enforcement elements to exert pressure on targeted companies, particularly those embroiled in internal disputes or vulnerable to boardroom shifts.
According to the report, one of the alleged tactics involved lodging complaints with the MACC against key individuals within a company, triggering investigations that could weaken their positions.
This, in turn, created openings for changes in management or ownership, effectively facilitating takeovers under the guise of regulatory scrutiny.
Amer, during his cross examination, also brought up a civil suit filed by Revenue Group against the brothers, where the brothers had filed a counter claim against Eddie as well.
Amer referred Eddie to court documents where the suit was discontinued and notice was issued as part of representation. Eddie confirmed with the lawyer that he was aware that the suit was discontinued.
Amer: In this regard, the company has decided not to pursue the matters in the claim involving the Vellfire?
Eddie: Yes.
Amer: The Toyota Vellfire was the subject matter of the case?
Eddie: Yes.
Amer: The matter was settled?
Eddie: Yes.
When this was revealed, judge Rosli Ahmad queried about the settled civil suit involving the vehicle: “Does this mean the company has already settled the vehicle dispute? So it is no longer an issue?” he asked.
Deputy public prosecutor Law Chin How, responding to that, said the parties are aware of the civil settlement and acknowledged that both brothers had sent letters of representation to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) two months ago, to seek a discharge in this case.
“Last month, we had replied the brothers that we will be continuing with the pursuance of the charge against them. However, there is nothing stopping them from sending another letter of representation,” he said.
Another lawyer representing the brothers, former MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Dzulkifli Ahmad, then informed the judge that they would be filing additional representations to the AGC next month.
The trial continues on June 9.
Edited By S Kanagaraju
