“Was the complaint verified in this case before launching the investigation?” he asked in a Facebook post.

The Puchong MP said MACC must verify facts in a report before it can launch investigations under the MACC Act.

He cited Section 29(3) of the Act which says: Where an officer of the commission has reason to suspect the commission of an offence under this Act following a report made under subsection (1), he shall cause an investigation to be carried out and for such purpose may exercise all the powers of investigation provided for under this Act and the Criminal Procedure Code.

“That provision is there to ensure that complaints have basis before probes are launched against persons named in reports.

“It fixes an obligation on the MACC, which is an important prerequisite for an investigation against a person.”

Gobind urged MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki to respond to this.

“Azam Baki must state whether the commission verified the matters stated in the report against the judge to begin with.

“If this has not been done, the judge cannot be probed as the basis of the complaint has not been established,” he added.

Yesterday, MACC dismissed criticism over its probe on Nazlan, maintaining it has the authority provided for under the MACC Act 2009 to probe any public official, including judges.

The agency also said it had investigated other judges in the past and after all these probes were completed, investigation papers were referred to the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) to decide whether to prosecute or not.

Nazlan lodged a police report last week over a news article alleging that he was being investigated for unexplained money in his bank account.

Nazlan was the trial judge who convicted and sentenced former prime minister Najib Razak on seven charges relating to RM42 million in funds belonging to SRC International on July 28, 2020.