PUTRAJAYA, Dec 3 — Businessman Albert Tei and former prime minister’s aide Datuk Seri Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin will be charged tomorrow at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court over multiple bribery offences, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) said today.

MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki said the investigation into the case has been completed, with both men set to face five charges each under the MACC Act 2009. 

They will also face an additional charge at the Shah Alam Sessions Court on Friday.

“I would like to inform you that the investigation has been fully completed. Tomorrow, two individuals, Mr Albert Tei and Datuk Seri Shamsul Iskandar, will be charged at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court,” he told reporters at a press conference in Putrajaya.

According to him, Shamsul will be charged under Section 17(a) for allegedly receiving gratification, while Tei will be charged under Section 17(b) for allegedly giving gratification.

He then confirmed that a third individual previously detained has been reclassified as a witness and will not be charged.

He also said the claims made by Tei’s wife that MACC officers did not provide a seizure list during a raid at their residence were false.

“The allegation is untrue. Our investigating officers complied fully with all SOPs and handed over the complete seizure list directly to Mr Albert Tei. 

“This should not be an issue, and I must correct the record,” he said.

Azam also denied allegations that it breached legal privilege in its investigation involving a lawyer who allegedly refused to cooperate with investigators.

He said that the commission had already lodged a police report and handed over all relevant materials, including recordings and documents, to assist the police. 

“Several MACC officers involved in the case have also been called in to provide statements.

“There is nothing we are trying to conceal. We have given all evidence to the police, and my officers have cooperated fully,” he said.

He also confirmed that the MACC is conducting a separate investigation involving the lawyer under Section 48 of the MACC Act 2009, which relates to failure or refusal to assist in an investigation.

Regarding claims that CCTV footage was unlawfully seized, he said that all actions were taken in compliance with the law and standard operating procedures. 

He explained that all materials necessary for the investigation were collected appropriately.

When asked about media reports describing Tei as a whistleblower, he clarified that he does not qualify for protection under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. 

This, Azam said, was because he is considered personally involved in actions related to the alleged wrongdoing.

“If a person is involved in a crime — for example, if someone assists in a murder case, even though the actual perpetrator is another individual, but they supply materials or help in preparing the crime — can they be protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act? No. 

“Even if they go to the police seeking protection, they are not eligible because they are themselves involved in the offence.

“In this case, he is not considered a whistleblower,” he added.