The lawyer questioned if such a scenario was “proper” and if Idrus knew how to deal with the situation.

“Idrus must also accept that in the event a case does proceed to court as a consequence of these investigations, it would become a matter of concern which may impact on the trial,” Gobind added.

The Securities Commission (SC) had on Jan 6 said that it “will be in touch” with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner so that Azam can provide an explanation after it was revealed that his brother had traded in shares using his account.

SC explained that securities accounts are opened with a central depository and all dealings involved must be done in the name of the beneficial owner of the securities or an authorised nominee.

Several days later, an NGO lodged a report with MACC, alleging misconduct and corruption among certain individuals in the higher management and board of directors of the SC.

In response, MACC said it will “review” the complaint before conducting an investigation.

MACC’s Anti-Corruption Advisory Board (ACAB) had previously “cleared” Azam of wrongdoing in relation to the shares trading.

The decision to clear Azam however did not sit well with the other six ACAB members as they claimed board chairman Abu Zahar Ujang had merely given his personal opinion.